Police discretion re ticketing in passing lanes

[Jack Miller]

The NZ Police speed enforcement guide states:
"When speed camera enforcement is taking place in the area of passing lanes, vehicles should not be targeted within 250 (two hundred and fifty) metres of the finish of any passing lane."

Paula Rose has explained it as follows:
"The policy was introduced to reduce the risk of vehicle crashes and the consequences of those crashes. The merging of vehicles at the ends of passing lanes is potentially hazardous. It requires vehicles to travel at similar speeds and merge 'like a zip'. Prior to this policy being introduced, there were reports of drivers in the process of merging suddenly braking and taking evasive action when they saw a speed camera vehicle ahead. These driver reactions led to higher risks of vehicle crashes than vehicle speeds alone. To minimise that increased crash risk, the policy was introduced to take the speed camera vehicles away from the immediate vision of drivers in the process of merging."

In another thread one of our resident traffic police officers wrote:

There is no Police policy against ticketing in passing lanes. The only reference to passing lanes is in the Speed Camera Policy, an entirely different policy which doesn't apply to mobile radar enforcement.

However, mobile radar enforcement from marked cars increases the risks Rose sought to minimise. In a country with just 2 degrees of separation it would not take many tickets to be issued in this way for word to get around. Once people become aware that marked police vehicles are deploying speed detection devices at the end of passing lanes they are likely to take the same risky evasive action rather than complete their overtaking manoeuvres safely every time such a vehicle approaches, regardless of whether it is operating a speed detection device or not. This would actually create more accident risks than operating visible speed cameras at these sites.

I have used this argument as one part of a many-faceted defense I have successfully deployed on the rare occasions of receiving speeding allegations in passing lanes. However, I do not believe it goes far enough. For a variety of reasons, safety being at the fore, I believe that the speed limit tolerance throughout entire passing lanes should be 40% higher than the actual speed limit, but what do you think?

[JimO]

they should be ticketing people who speed up in passing lanes then slow down to their normal 85ks

[Jack Miller]

they should be ticketing people who speed up in passing lanes then slow down to their normal 85ks

I love your thinking but foresee difficulties would be raised by enforcers wondering how they could tell if the vehicle approaching them at 100 was doing 85 a few minutes earlier.

[Virago]

they should be ticketing people who speed up in passing lanes then slow down to their normal 85ks

You've done the Canterbury Grand Prix too, huh...? :facepalm:

[FJRider]

I love your thinking but foresee difficulties would be raised by enforcers wondering how they could tell if the vehicle approaching them at 100 was doing 85 a few minutes earlier.

They can't ... so they ticket those doing 110-120 km's in the passing lanes ... rather than watch those passing at 90-100 km's outside those areas ... :shutup:

[tigertim20]

the problem is the people who (I will be honest, I have done this a few times) get to a passing lane, and just fucking GAS it to a ridiculous speed, to get past as many people as possible. If you are seen doing say 140, well, thats really not necessary is it? and probably fair enough you get a ticket.:violin:

I do have an issue with getting pinged for 110 at the end of one though, but hey.:innocent:

Heres a novel idea. use the energy you use raising all these things on KB on something else instead, like starting an action group to get concrete answers on what exactly police are instructed to do in these seemingly debatable circumstances. It may yield a better result than whining aimlessly on a messageboard.:yes:

Yes, Im serious.:corn:

[Jack Miller]

the problem is the people who (I will be honest, I have done this a few times) get to a passing lane, and just fucking GAS it to a ridiculous speed, to get past as many people as possible. If you are seen doing say 140, well, thats really not necessary is it? and probably fair enough you get a ticket.:violin:

I do have an issue with getting pinged for 110 at the end of one though, but hey.:innocent:

Heres a novel idea. use the energy you use raising all these things on KB on something else instead, like starting an action group to get concrete answers on what exactly police are instructed to do in these seemingly debatable circumstances. It may yield a better result than whining aimlessly on a messageboard.:yes:

Yes, Im serious.:corn:

I'm not surprised you've gassed it to get past as many people as possible. You're probably responding to an illegal situation that has built up over the last few miles or so: 1st people driving at less than the speed limit not moving left to allow others past when they could; 2nd people who don't intend passing following too closely to allow someone who does to pick them off one at a time; 3rd the entire queue speeding up as soon as you get to the passing lane. All three are illegal and combined they create a very common, frustrating situation, if not dangerous. Gassing it to get past at the safest possible place (a passing lane that is designed especially for it) is perfectly understandable. And, so long as the other vehicles continue to follow too closely to allow you to rejoin the queue it's either all or none isn't it?

As to doing something about it; I have OIA requests in to the various enforcement authorities for details of tickets issued. I already have the national crash statistics detailing the factors recorded as contributing to accidents. So far the enforcement authorities have not provided the ticket details but I haven't given up. When I get them I will publish a chart correlating accident factors against ticketing for those factors. My initial expectation is that there will be no correlation. Few tickets will be issued for the factors that contribute to most accidents; many tickets will be issued for factors that contribute to few accidents. As an example, "exceeding the speed limit" is recorded as a factor in just 5% of accidents. Various authorities and methodologies are used to ticket against this including the Highway Patrol, Local Authorities, RADAR, LASER & Speed Cameras. According to one of our resident traffic rule enforcers (rastuscat), one group that has an especially low focus on "exceeding the speed limit" is his group. Yet even he admits to issuing considerably more than 5% of tickets for it (about double IIRC.) Once we add the speed cameras etc to the mix I'm pretty sure we will find that enforcement is not even slightly focused on the factors actually recorded as contributing to accidents. However, I'll wait till I've completed the research for a definitive conclusion.

I believe this is more likely to succeed than trying to get straight answers to what exactly police are instructed to do. Even if straight answers could be obtained there is no guarantee that all Popos do what they are instructed to do. Our resident Popos have confirmed that their group is just like every other group of humans - a mixed bunch. That is why I am basing my work on actual tickets issued - it will tell us what is actually happening, as opposed to what certain authorities say should be happening.

[Hoon]

Gee you really had my attention until the 40% part. I think you'd have more luck winning lotto.
10% may have been a reasonable request but 40% is pure fantasy. Also claiming this increase is for the purpose of improved safety really does bring your credibility and motive into question.

[Jack Miller]

Gee you really had my attention until the 40% part. I think you'd have more luck winning lotto.
10% may have been a reasonable request but 40% is pure fantasy. Also claiming this increase is for the purpose of improved safety really does bring your credibility and motive into question.

But at 110kph there is already a 10% tolerance, that would make options 1 & 2 the same.

Besides, if one asks for 40% one might get 20%

[jellywrestler]

I believe that the speed limit tolerance throughout entire passing lanes should be 40% higher than the actual speed limit, but what do you think?
cool does that include multilane motorways?

[oneofsix]

cool does that include multilane motorways?

I can remember way back when they used to have a higher limit anyway but that was before the 100kph limit for 'open road'. I think they should bring back a 120k limit for motorways and expressways, with a 110k limit for multi-laned highways.

[Scuba_Steve]

cool does that include multilane motorways?

Nah you times that 40% by the amount of extra lanes i.e. the 3rd lane is 80% tolerance 4th is 120% tolerance :innocent:

[Jack Miller]

cool does that include multilane motorways?

Maybe, but I have to think about it. Overtaking lanes are specifically designed for overtaking. Also, they are often the only place you can pass safely for many kilometers. On a multilane motorway you can pass anywhere along it i.e.; it is like there is always a passing lane so the particular place where you pass isn't dictated or limited and you can take more time over it. Also you tend not to get the problem of slow queues building up on motorways that then speed up (entirely and as a queue) when you go to pass them. If you do get build up on motorways it is probably too busy in general for high overtaking speeds to be prudent. If the increased tolerance included motorways you'd get people roaring along the entire length at 140 then telling the Popo "I was just overtaking someone." The purpose is not to make 140 the defacto speed limit. It is a discretionary, absolute top-end tolerance for the very specific situation of a momentary peak speed when overtaking on our scarce, expensive passing lanes. So, on reflection, for the purposes of this poll I'll keep it to passing lanes.

And maybe 140 is too high. I only gave it as an example. If it wins out as the preferred option I can run another poll to see what people think the special passing lane tolerance should actually be.

[slofox]

... I can run another poll to see what people think the special passing lane tolerance should actually be.

About 220 should do it...:whistle:

[bogan]

About 120 for passing lanes (and inside lanes on motorways) would be logical I reckon, incendentally a lot of police would let you off doing those speeds anyway. For straight open road ones anyway, it's a bit excessive for the curvy uphil ones (though the kaimais is pretty enjoyable at those sort of speed :innocent:).

[jellywrestler]

If it wins out as the preferred option I can run another poll to see what people think the special passing lane tolerance should actually be.
Hey I'm in Wellington, I'd love a bit of humour when you take this poll to parliament,let us know when you do

[Jack Miller]

Hey I'm in Wellington, I'd love a bit of humour when you take this poll to parliament,let us know when you do

The 2010 NZ Land Transport Safety Strategy has run it's course, lessons have been learned and the 2020 Strategy is in train. One lesson that has been learned is that the old crime & punishment approach has failed to tackle the top causes of accidents - a new way is being sought. Polls like this are useful input but probably only as a pilot for larger research. Although decision makers are listening and taking submissions. However, the first step is to see if there is anything to be said on this matter: Are we happy with current speed limit enforcement or is there something to be improved - in this instance with respect to passing lanes.

[Daffyd]

I can remember way back when they used to have a higher limit anyway but that was before the 100kph limit for 'open road'. I think they should bring back a 120k limit for motorways and expressways, with a 110k limit for multi-laned highways.

I think your memory is playing tricks on you. IIRC back when the national limit was 50mph it was raised to 60mph for motorways only, then the differential was dropped when the country changed to metric and the limit was raised to 100km/h. (I stand to be corrected.)

[Ender EnZed]

The purpose is not to make 140 the defacto speed limit.

That's the effect though. Currently the effective open road speed limit is 110km/h, on holiday weekends it's 105km/h. If it were raised to 140km/h on passing lanes while overtaking then a significant proportion of people, including myself, would travel at the higher effect limit whenever possible to do so without risking a ticket. Maybe not always in the car, but it'd make no difference to fuel use on the bike.

[Jack Miller]

That's the effect though. Currently the effective open road speed limit is 110km/h, on holiday weekends it's 105km/h. If it were raised to 140km/h on passing lanes then a significant proportion of people, including myself, would travel at the higher effect limit whenever possible. Maybe not always in the car, but it'd make no difference to fuel use on the bike.

I'm not sure it would be the effect though. If you're not actually passing (and this would be easy for the popo to determine) then you get the ticket.

[oneofsix]

I'm not sure it would be the effect though. If you're not actually passing (and this would be easy for the popo to determine) then you get the ticket.

your 40% tolerance would only apply to those who are passing? If those being passed are in excess of the 10% tolerance they should be pinged twice, once for speeding and once for preventing overtaking.

[Jack Miller]

your 40% tolerance would only apply to those who are passing?
That's the idea - I should have made it clearer.


If those being passed are in excess of the 10% tolerance they should be pinged twice, once for speeding and once for preventing overtaking.

Three times actually. They were probably doing less than the speed limit prior to the passing lane and then sped up. So the two you mention and a third for impeding a few minutes earlier;-) (Just kidding - if I can be sure the Police won't fish in passing lanes anymore I'll get a whole lot more relaxed about impeders)

[Ender EnZed]

I'm not sure it would be the effect though. If you're not actually passing (and this would be easy for the popo to determine) then you get the ticket.

I've edited my post to make it clearer that I meant while fulfilling the criteria for the higher tolerance.

Also, I'm not sure it would be that easy to determine whether an overtake was occurring. Does the overtaking vehicle need to be in the passing lane before starting to accelerate? If the answer was "yes" then that's straightforward to enforce but less practical in terms of keeping the passing lane clear unless it's being used. A question that would be likely to cause more trouble would be how close does the overtaking vehicle need to get to the one it's passing before the higher tolerance applies? Call it x metres, it'll come up in court whenever someone gets a ticket in a passing lane.

[Parlane]

I've edited my post to make it clearer that I meant while fulfilling the criteria for the higher tolerance.

Also, I'm not sure it would be that easy to determine whether an overtake was occurring. Does the overtaking vehicle need to be in the passing lane before starting to accelerate? If the answer was "yes" then that's straightforward to enforce but less practical in terms of keeping the passing lane clear unless it's being used. A question that would be likely to cause more trouble would be how close does the overtaking vehicle need to get to the one it's passing before the higher tolerance applies? Call it x metres, it'll come up in court whenever someone gets a ticket in a passing lane.

I would assume the 3 second rule applies? They should be within 3 - 4 seconds of the car infront before starting to accelerate while moving into the passing lane. As far as I know, moving in to the other lane and accelerating to a higher speed happen at the same time.

[Ender EnZed]

cool does that include multilane motorways?


Maybe, but I have to think about it. Overtaking lanes are specifically designed for overtaking. Also, they are often the only place you can pass safely for many kilometers. On a multilane motorway you can pass anywhere along it i.e.; it is like there is always a passing lane so the particular place where you pass isn't dictated or limited and you can take more time over it. Also you tend not to get the problem of slow queues building up on motorways that then speed up (entirely and as a queue) when you go to pass them. If you do get build up on motorways it is probably too busy in general for high overtaking speeds to be prudent. If the increased tolerance included motorways you'd get people roaring along the entire length at 140 then telling the Popo "I was just overtaking someone." The purpose is not to make 140 the defacto speed limit. It is a discretionary, absolute top-end tolerance for the very specific situation of a momentary peak speed when overtaking on our scarce, expensive passing lanes. So, on reflection, for the purposes of this poll I'll keep it to passing lanes.

One difficulty here would be all the roads that aren't classified as motorways but are multilane for many kilometres. Technically they're passing lanes but in most respects that affect traffic flow they're the same as motorways.

[Ender EnZed]

I would assume the 3 second rule applies? They should be within 3 - 4 seconds of the car infront before starting to accelerate while moving into the passing lane. As far as I know, moving in to the other lane and accelerating to a higher speed happen at the same time.

To keep the amount of time spent out of the left lane to a minimum I do a significant amount of accelerating prior to moving out. This applies whether using a passing lane or oncoming lane.

EDIT: Also, basing it on time wouldn't work very well as it would be dependent on speed. If you were doing 140 you could start overtaking sooner than you could at 100.

[slofox]

Despite the apparent sense in all this, I suspect that such a practice would quickly degenerate to a point where we would have idiots camped out in the passing lanes roaring past everything on the road - rather as some...errr never mind.

One of the joys of a bike is that ability to zoom past stuff - if I was allowed 140, I just bet it'd get up higher than that before you could say "boo".

[Jack Miller]

One difficulty here would be all the roads that aren't classified as motorways but are multilane for many kilometres. Technically they're passing lanes but in most respects that affect traffic flow they're the same as motorways.

No, lets just keep it to passing lanes that are marked as such, for the same reasons as I worked out for motorways. We can think about multi-lane roads another time.

[Jack Miller]

I've edited my post to make it clearer that I meant while fulfilling the criteria for the higher tolerance.

Also, I'm not sure it would be that easy to determine whether an overtake was occurring. Does the overtaking vehicle need to be in the passing lane before starting to accelerate?

No


A question that would be likely to cause more trouble would be how close does the overtaking vehicle need to get to the one it's passing before the higher tolerance applies? Call it x metres, it'll come up in court whenever someone gets a ticket in a passing lane.

Doesn't need to be as complicated as that. This is an enforcement policy about discretion. It's not a court decision, it's a real-time Popo on the road decision. It'll never go to court. Anyway, its obvious when someone is overtaking - they're either accelerating towards the slower vehicle from behind, alongside it travelling faster, or past it moving left and slowing down.

[Jack Miller]

Despite the apparent sense in all this, I suspect that such a practice would quickly degenerate to a point where we would have idiots camped out in the passing lanes roaring past everything on the road - rather as some...errr never mind.

Yeah I can see that. Two mates, a Morrie and a Z1R taking turns being the overtaker and the overtakee. But so what? The riskiest part would be the U turns they'd be doing at the end of each run.


One of the joys of a bike is that ability to zoom past stuff - if I was allowed 140, I just bet it'd get up higher than that before you could say "boo".
Then you'd get a ticket, just like you do if you exceed the current tolerances.

[Ender EnZed]

No, lets just keep it to passing lanes that are marked as such, for the same reasons as I worked out for motorways. We can think about multi-lane roads another time.

But they are marked as passing lanes. The big black text on white background "Keep left unless passing" sign as one lane opens to two in a 100km/h area. What length of road with two lanes in one direction makes it a multilane road rather than a passing lane?

I'm not trying to be annoying here, I'd very much like to be able to overtake safely without risking a ticket. I just think that it's not necessarily as simple as one might hope.

[rastuscat]

Interesting discussion.

If a driver/rider is travelling along in the left lane of a passing lane, and there isn't anyone else there, should he be entitled to the higher tolerance? It won't happen anyway, but it's an interesting thought.

I've issued a number of tickets to lone vehicles in passing lanes, only to have the drivers claim to have been passing. Thing is, they maybe did pass at the start of the lane, but then forgot to slow down. We occasionally ticket drivers several km past the passing lane, who have just forgotten to slow down.

Like I said, yet another thought provoking thread.

I've been relieving on the HP for 6 weeks, tomorrow I start back in the city. In the last 6 weeks I've driven along passing lanes and seen people over the tolerance. And I have just driven on, as long as they are overtaking and not flying for the sake of it.

I know my staff do the same thing, so despite all the talk about revenue collecting in passing lanes, you'd be surprised at how much common sense is shown by the Popos out there. Thing is, whoever gets a speeding ticket inevitably distorts the facts to show that the Popo was nit picking.

Every story has 2 sides, so next time you hear someone telling a story about how hard done by they were, remember that there is almost inevitably another side to it.

I do recall that in 1993 I had a dude bitching to me about having had a speed camera ticket for 52 in a 50 kmh area. I asked him to produce the ticket, which he did. It was for 63, but the guy was adamant that he was only going 52. So he bitches all over about a camera ticket for 52 when it didn't actually happen. Never let the facts stand in the way of a good whinge.

I'll vote on this one. Interesting to see the outcome, but not surprising.

Disappointingly common sense approach Jack. I expected more of you. :facepalm:

[Ender EnZed]

Doesn't need to be as complicated as that. This is an enforcement policy about discretion. It's not a court decision, it's a real-time Popo on the road decision. It'll never go to court.

Yes and no. If I got a ticket for 101km/h I'd take it to court and argue that it shouldn't have been issued, even though I was breaking the speed limit. I'd probably still have to pay the ticket but anyone in that position would be pissed off.


Anyway, its obvious when someone is overtaking - they're either accelerating towards the slower vehicle from behind, alongside it travelling faster, or past it moving left and slowing down.

I don't know that it is. If you're on the last pasing lane for 50km and there's a truck in front of you doing 80km/h that you'd catch up to at the end of the passing lane if you stayed at 100 then what would you do? I'd speed up to 120 early and cover some distance before overtaking in order to pull back in safely before the passing lane finishes. There are going to be grey areas.

[Parlane]

Yeah I can see that. Two mates, a Morrie and a Z1R taking turns being the overtaker and the overtakee. But so what? The riskiest part would be the U turns they'd be doing at the end of each run.


Then you'd get a ticket, just like you do if you exceed the current tolerances.

And loss of licence... Due to being over 40km/h...

[scumdog]

Voted.

And have to say I have never issued a ticket to anybody on a passing lane, period.

And can't say I know anybody who has.

Not saying there's not the zealous guy or two that wouldn't ticket in the same circumstances...

[Jack Miller]

But they are marked as passing lanes. The big black text on white background "Keep left unless passing" sign as one lane opens to two in a 100km/h area. What length of road with two lanes in one direction makes it a multilane road rather than a passing lane?

I'm not trying to be annoying here, I'd very much like to be able to overtake safely without risking a ticket. I just think that it's not necessarily as simple as one might hope.

Really long passing lanes eh? OK I see the problem. A long stretch of double lane, several cars on it spaced out ahead. "Can I speed up to 140, pass one and slow down to the speed limit again; or can I hold it at 140 and try to pass the lot?"
Philosophically the intention is the former not the latter. Furthermore, if you can get past in the space available at less than 140 then you shouldn't reach 140, just whatever speed is necessary to get past within the clear road ahead and without preventing others behind from also overtaking. Also, 140 is a momentary peak - the fastest part of the maneuver not a sustained speed.

It needs more thought than I have time for right now. In the meantime, someone else might figure out the answer. I'm sure we can find one if we put our heads together. Maybe the answer is to vote for option 3 and have an open tolerance for exceeding the speed limit in passing lanes. Popos could use other charges like "excessive speed" or "reckless driving" for abuses of the tolerance, which I always intended even for option 2. I wouldn't expect Popos to ignore someone overtaking at 140 in a fog!

[Ender EnZed]

If a driver/rider is travelling along in the left lane of a passing lane, and there isn't anyone else there, should he be entitled to the higher tolerance? It won't happen anyway, but it's an interesting thought.

OP has already said no.


I've driven along passing lanes and seen people over the tolerance. And I have just driven on, as long as they are overtaking and not flying for the sake of it.

I know my staff do the same thing

This has been my experience. But I do agree with Jack that it would be nice if this could be relied upon rather than just a gamble.

[slofox]

Voted.

And have to say I have never issued a ticket to anybody on a passing lane, period.

And can't say I know anybody who has.

Not saying there's not the zealous guy or two that wouldn't ticket in the same circumstances...


Driving herself's car, I was passing a truck and trailer towards the end of a passing lane not so long ago. There was a LEO with radar activated back behind me. So I didn't fang it to get past in time. Just about got minced up by the truck. Stupid decision on my part but there ya go.

Course, even though there was a huge shoulder area off to the left, the truckie made his point by not giving me any leeway...

[Jack Miller]

Voted.

And have to say I have never issued a ticket to anybody on a passing lane, period.

And can't say I know anybody who has.

Not saying there's not the zealous guy or two that wouldn't ticket in the same circumstances...

I've met your zealot. 3 times in fact, although on checking the first occasion it was almost 10 years ago (hold a grudge? Me?) But the last one was this year and it leaves me very nervous about overtaking. There's enough going on without worrying about that 1 in a thousand zealot causing mayhem in the middle of it. If we could stop impeders speeding up when we try and pass we'd not need this. But we can't so I think we do.

[Jack Miller]

Driving herself's car, I was passing a truck and trailer towards the end of a passing lane not so long ago. There was a LEO with radar activated back behind me. So I didn't fang it to get past in time. Just about got minced up by the truck. Stupid decision on my part but there ya go.

Course, even though there was a huge shoulder area off to the left, the truckie made his point by not giving me any leeway...

If you had a hands free kit you could've *555'd the cop asking them to book the truck for impeding. I'm sure you'd move to the shoulder to let the following LEO past to pull the truck over than sailed on by happily. But *555ing from a bike is a real hassle. An overtaking enforcement policy we can rely on seems better.

[scumdog]

I've met your zealot. 3 times in fact, although on checking the first occasion it was almost 10 years ago (hold a grudge? Me?) But the last one was this year and it leaves me very nervous about overtaking. There's enough going on without worrying about that 1 in a thousand zealot causing mayhem in the middle of it. If we could stop impeders speeding up when we try and pass we'd not need this. But we can't so I think we do.

I've overtaken HEAPS of cars in my life, some on passing lanes but mostly not.

And the only speeding ticket I have ever had was when I was overtaking - in 1987.

But I don't hold a grudge about that either.

[Parlane]

If you had a hands free kit you could've *555'd the cop asking them to book the truck for impeding. I'm sure you'd move to the shoulder to let the following LEO past to pull the truck over than sailed on by happily. But *555ing from a bike is a real hassle. An overtaking enforcement policy we can rely on seems better.

Offtopic, but you don't have to have a hands free kit to call *555.

[Scuba_Steve]

I've overtaken HEAPS of cars in my life, some on passing lanes but mostly not.

And the only speeding ticket I have ever had was when I was overtaking - in 1987.

But I don't hold a grudge about that either.

Well see there's something too, this thread only addresses passing lanes. What about passing on the opposite side of the road where "speeding" is safer than not???

[slofox]

If you had a hands free kit you could've *555'd the cop asking them to book the truck for impeding. I'm sure you'd move to the shoulder to let the following LEO past to pull the truck over than sailed on by happily. But *555ing from a bike is a real hassle. An overtaking enforcement policy we can rely on seems better.

My knees were knocking together about then...oh and herself was telling me off for being a tit as well...

[Berries]

I wouldn't get too worked up about it. I don't think the government is going to set policy based on the ramblings on an internet forum.

[Parlane]

I wouldn't get too worked up about it. I don't think the government is going to set policy based on the ramblings on an internet forum.

It's just where it starts..

[ducatilover]

You know those people who speed up on passing lanes?
What's the bet they'll still do that, except faster.

One of the biggest things with those people is, the road is wider/safer looking, most of them speed up without noticing because with a wider road their comfortable speed threshold increases, hence why they slow back down after the passing lane. It's usually not an arrogance thing (although, you do get that :facepalm: ).

I think a higher limit in passing lanes is a nice idea, but, there are many passing lanes that are not safe at higher speeds and so many people already fuck it up without going over the speed limit.
I think, better training for drivers and riders (not that we have "training" as a mandatory thing....) would be far better. I think; if an individual was in more control and more alert, they would be able to travel at a comfortable 100km/h and there would be less want to pass them.

I can understand where this idea is coming from and I myself would like a higher speed limit on passing lanes, but, sadly there are a lot of variables and idiots to be accounted for.

Yet again, I can bring it back to a complete lack of driver training :innocent:

[Ender EnZed]

You know those people who speed up on passing lanes?
What's the bet they'll still do that, except faster.


Don't see why they would. The road won't get any wider and they'll still be at risk of a ticket.


I think, better training for drivers and riders (not that we have "training" as a mandatory thing....) would be far better.

I agree. It's ridiculous that most of the people in control of vehicles on NZ roads have had zero formal training.

[Berries]

One of the biggest things with those people is, the road is wider/safer looking, most of them speed up without noticing because with a wider road their comfortable speed threshold increases, hence why they slow back down after the passing lane. It's usually not an arrogance thing (although, you do get that :facepalm: )
That is exactly it, it is an unconscious reaction to the change in environment brought on by the localised road widening. It will happen, get used to it.

Let's face it, 140km/h is not going to happen due to the great variance in the standard of passing lanes across the country. It might be better to try and convince TPTB that they need to have another look at their own policy on overtaking opportunities (http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/passing-overtaking-policy-to-practice/index.html) and start putting things in to practice. That would help all road users, not just the confident ones who want to have a fang but also the less confident ones who cause half the problems.

[Jack Miller]

That is exactly it, it is an unconscious reaction to the change in environment brought on by the localised road widening. It will happen, get used to it.

If they were driving conscious of other road users or cared about them they wouldn't speed up. However, unconscious/uncaring drivers exist so it does happen as you say, but I am not prepared to accept your suggestion to simply "get used to it."

There are at least a few things that can be done:
1. Report impeders to *555
2. Record the registration numbers of impeders if *555 isn't effective and make complaints, insist on fines not just warnings and be prepared to go to court as a witness if necessary
3. Good traffic cops already use discretion about overtakers. Unfortunately, bad cops use it as a fishing opportunity. Which is why I'm exploring the possibility of a formal policy and traffic cop education about it.
4. If you get a ticket in a passing lane fight it with everything available*. The traffic cop who issued it is one of the bad ones who prefers fishing to improving safety and the goal should be getting him or her sacked. Rightly or wrongly it is possible to get off just about any speeding ticket if you play it right and fight hard enough. On these occasions the effort it is justified.
5. Much of that detailed in the Passing & Overtaking Policy To Practice document costs money. With Chch to fix, the EQC fund to replenish, the recession etc full implementation is unlikely. However, when passing lanes are due for repainting the left lane could be made narrower and the right lane wider at little incremental cost.


For our traffic cops: Can you tell us if there are any formal processes around police discretion geared to identifying "best practice" and implementing it across the board, or is it really just a lottery that depends on who you get?
______________
*Assuming it was just a speeding ticket and you weren't being reckless, careless, etc

[Parlane]

5. Much of that detailed in the Passing & Overtaking Policy To Practice document costs money. With Chch to fix, the EQC fund to replenish, the recession etc full implementation is unlikely. However, when passing lanes are due for repainting the left lane could be made narrower and the right lane wider at little incremental cost.


I had the exact same thought regarding making the left lane smaller. As someone stated, people feel safer in the passing lanes due to them being wider, so they speed up. If you make them think they are going down a skinny tunnel, they are unlikely to speed up.

[ducatilover]

Don't see why they would. The road won't get any wider and they'll still be at risk of a ticket.
There are a few people I know who would, needless to say they'll get a smack if they did.




I agree. It's ridiculous that most of the people in control of vehicles on NZ roads have had zero formal training.
It worries me greatly, our road toll and accident rates would be far, far lower with real training, unfortunately we have a penny pinching gubbermint who would not be willing to help save people. People are not valued as high as the dollar :facepalm:

[Parlane]

It worries me greatly, our road toll and accident rates would be far, far lower with real training, unfortunately we have a penny pinching gubbermint who would not be willing to help save people. People are not valued as high as the dollar :facepalm:

The government could easily profit from extra training though.. Make defensive courses compulsory. Government can take a cut.

Make practical car/bike on road training compulsory. Government can take a cut.

[Scuba_Steve]

IMO compulsory training from the Govt is NOT a good idea, in-fact I think it would be quite a bad idea, pumping out more useless drivers at a higher level of incompetence

[Parlane]

IMO compulsory training from the Govt is NOT a good idea, in-fact I think it would be quite a bad idea, pumping out more useless drivers at a higher level of incompetence

I was talking about courses like this:
http://www.motorcycleschool.co.nz/index.php?page=advanced

And having x number of hours with a trained instructor before you sit your learners for car etc. Then an offensive/defensive practical driving lesson on a track for car before you get your full. My dad did one at some point, no idea where though. He said it helped a lot though.

[yachtie10]

If they were driving conscious of other road users or cared about them they wouldn't speed up. However, unconscious/uncaring drivers exist so it does happen as you say, but I am not prepared to accept your suggestion to simply "get used to it."

There are at least a few things that can be done:
1. Report impeders to *555
2. Record the registration numbers of impeders if *555 isn't effective and make complaints, insist on fines not just warnings and be prepared to go to court as a witness if necessary
3. Good traffic cops already use discretion about overtakers. Unfortunately, bad cops use it as a fishing opportunity. Which is why I'm exploring the possibility of a formal policy and traffic cop education about it.
4. If you get a ticket in a passing lane fight it with everything available*. The traffic cop who issued it is one of the bad ones who prefers fishing to improving safety and the goal should be getting him or her sacked. Rightly or wrongly it is possible to get off just about any speeding ticket if you play it right and fight hard enough. On these occasions the effort it is justified.
5. Much of that detailed in the Passing & Overtaking Policy To Practice document costs money. With Chch to fix, the EQC fund to replenish, the recession etc full implementation is unlikely. However, when passing lanes are due for repainting the left lane could be made narrower and the right lane wider at little incremental cost.


For our traffic cops: Can you tell us if there are any formal processes around police discretion geared to identifying "best practice" and implementing it across the board, or is it really just a lottery that depends on who you get?
______________
*Assuming it was just a speeding ticket and you weren't being reckless, careless, etc

Good post but number 2 is impractical
We cant fine people on hearsay of the public or we would end up with a lot more "bad cops"
I would hope the police keep track of complaints againts a driver (plate number) but not sure what they can do about it?

[Scuba_Steve]

I was talking about courses like this:
http://www.motorcycleschool.co.nz/index.php?page=advanced

And having x number of hours with a trained instructor before you sit your learners for car etc. Then an offensive/defensive practical driving lesson on a track for car before you get your full. My dad did one at some point, no idea where though. He said it helped a lot though.

I know what people have in mind and it's not a bad idea, but I also know if the Govt made training compulsory it wouldn't be that, and it would be far worse than current.

Think it definitely comes under "be careful what you wish for"

[slofox]

I would hope the police keep track of complaints againts a driver (plate number) but not sure what they can do about it?

Maybe this needs to be done by an independent, non-police agency. Run it the same way as Community Traffic Watch but make the database public and free to view. That way, if a certain Rego crops up again and again the attention of the LEO's could be drawn to that plate.

It'd also mean you could check your own reg to see how many drivers you have pissed off by hurtling past them at warp factor 9...:shutup:

[Parlane]

I know what people have in mind and it's not a bad idea, but I also know if the Govt made training compulsory it wouldn't be that, and it would be far worse than current.

Think it definitely comes under "be careful what you wish for"

You make a fair point. I keep coming to the conclusion that there is no fix.

Maybe even harder testing on driving tests...
Maybe get rid of multichoice questions in the learners test and replace it with a short answer style test. Of course the AA can charge more for their time etc. Why should getting the right to drive be a cheap affair anyway ?

Motorcycle leaners test is a complete joke IMO. I shouldn't have been on the road before doing the extra course with Mike to get the basics down. I learnt with a friend, who never mentioned counter steering.. (And I don't ride a pushbike, so it didn't come naturally). At the time I did do the basics course with Mike, I already had everything down, but a few theory things got me better sorted for riding on the road. And just the knowledge that I made sure I did have the practical things right too.

[Parlane]

Maybe this needs to be done by an independent, non-police agency. Run it the same way as Community Traffic Watch but make the database public and free to view. That way, if a certain Rego crops up again and again the attention of the LEO's could be drawn to that plate.

It'd also mean you could check your own reg to see how many drivers you have pissed off by hurtling past them at warp factor 9...:shutup:

Want me to set one up? A nice name and shame site? Links to youtube videos of pushbikes who don't obey red light rules because they're on a pushbike and have no plate? Fuckers. :angry:

[Ender EnZed]

Maybe this needs to be done by an independent, non-police agency. Run it the same way as Community Traffic Watch but make the database public and free to view. That way, if a certain Rego crops up again and again the attention of the LEO's could be drawn to that plate.

It'd also mean you could check your own reg to see how many drivers you have pissed off by hurtling past them at warp factor 9...:shutup:

You'd get far too many false accusations, it would be bordering on defamation. Just look at what happens to the questions in Trademe auctions when someone complains about a seller on here.

[Parlane]

You'd get far too many false accusations, it would be bordering on defamation. Just look at what happens to the questions in Trademe auctions when someone complains about a seller on here.

Pics/video evidence for actual negative posts.

[slofox]

You'd get far too many false accusations, it would be bordering on defamation. Just look at what happens to the questions in Trademe auctions when someone complains about a seller on here.

This has crossed my mind. But Community Traffic Watch is faced with the exact same thing and it seems to truck along OK.

[ducatilover]

The government could easily profit from extra training though.. Make defensive courses compulsory. Government can take a cut.

Make practical car/bike on road training compulsory. Government can take a cut.

Not going to happen with National in....they're far too short sighted :facepalm:

[Scuba_Steve]

You make a fair point. I keep coming to the conclusion that there is no fix.

Maybe even harder testing on driving tests...
Maybe get rid of multichoice questions in the learners test and replace it with a short answer style test. Of course the AA can charge more for their time etc. Why should getting the right to drive be a cheap affair anyway ?

Motorcycle leaners test is a complete joke IMO. I shouldn't have been on the road before doing the extra course with Mike to get the basics down. I learnt with a friend, who never mentioned counter steering.. (And I don't ride a pushbike, so it didn't come naturally). At the time I did do the basics course with Mike, I already had everything down, but a few theory things got me better sorted for riding on the road. And just the knowledge that I made sure I did have the practical things right too.

Well the licence & driving ability is a good point/topic so I have put my thoughts here
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/142001-Driving-amp-licensing-A-generation-Z-perspective?p=1130152466#post1130152466

[Ender EnZed]

Pics/video evidence for actual negative posts.

I'd have no problem with that but it's very rare to have video evidence.


This has crossed my mind. But Community Traffic Watch is faced with the exact same thing and it seems to truck along OK.

The entertainment value would be very different if the number of allegations against a specific rego plate was available to public view. I think the current system works alright.

[slofox]

The entertainment value would be very different if the number of allegations against a specific rego plate was available to public view. I think the current system works alright.

It would be wouldn't it? (Entertainment value I mean).

Current system gives the person complaining no evidence of any action being taken - sure you get a letter from the coppers (form letter) but there is absolutely no way of knowing whether your original complaint has been actioned or not. They say they send a letter but how wouldya know?

[Jack Miller]

Good post but number 2 is impractical
We cant fine people on hearsay of the public or we would end up with a lot more "bad cops"
There is a stronger form you can get than the Community Roadwatch Report (which is basically hearsay.) As far as I know the stronger form isn't available online but any traffic cop should have a blank one available and you can get them from any police station. These complaint forms do allow you to make the complaint formal and even request prosecution. If you do request prosecution you have to be willing to front up in court and give evidence, which takes it beyond hearsay. Next time a traffic cop pulls you over ask for a few blank forms or pick some up from your local station.

[scumdog]

There is a stronger form you can get than the Community Roadwatch Report (which is basically hearsay.) Next time a traffic cop pulls you over ask for a few blank forms or pick some up from your local station.




How is it anymore hearsay than a statement made by somebody?

I genuinely mean that, can you elaborate?

If true they're hardly worth filling in.

And if I had to wait until I was stopped by a traffic cop to get one of those forms I might have to wait a bloody long time!!:D

[Jack Miller]

How is it anymore hearsay than a statement made by somebody?
I genuinely mean that, can you elaborate?
If true they're hardly worth filling in.
And if I had to wait until I was stopped by a traffic cop to get one of those forms I might have to wait a bloody long time!!:D
The Comunity Roadwatch process is more or less hearsay. Someone tells the cops in an online form that they saw someone else driving badly. The cops respond, not sure how but not with legal action.

The form I'm talking about (I have a copy here but it doesn't have a name or form number unfortunately) is more serious. you have to actually sign it. You also have to get the cop you give it to to sign it. It requires you to provide quite a bit of detail; time, place, description of what happened, description of offending vehicle & driver, map, independent witness details if available, your personal & contact details. It allows you to specify you either want the other driver spoken to and warned, or you want him or her prosecuted. If you choose the latter you have to agree to be available to go to court and be a witness. I guess that is the point where it becomes more than hearsay: because the defense can cross-examine you, you're under oath, and a judge is presiding.

[jellywrestler]

The Comunity Roadwatch process is more or less hearsay. Someone tells the cops in an online form that they saw someone else driving badly. The cops respond, not sure how but not with legal action.

The form I'm talking about (I have a copy here but it doesn't have a name or form number unfortunately) is more serious. you have to actually sign it. You also have to get the cop you give it to to sign it. It requires you to provide quite a bit of detail; time, place, description of what happened, description of offending vehicle & driver, map, independent witness details if available, your personal & contact details. It allows you to specify you either want the other driver spoken to and warned, or you want him or her prosecuted. If you choose the latter you have to agree to be available to go to court and be a witness. I guess that is the point where it becomes more than hearsay: because the defense can cross-examine you, you're under oath, and a judge is presiding.
cool, it'll be easy for you to scan it and post a copy on here then eh?

[scumdog]

The Comunity Roadwatch process is more or less hearsay. Someone tells the cops in an online form that they saw someone else driving badly. The cops respond, not sure how but not with legal action.

.

Yep, know of them - mostly the comms say the person will come in and make a formal complaint, sometimes they just want the offending driver given a flea in his ear.

If formal complaint made then normally a penalty of some sort will be dished out - sometimes a summons to Court, sometimes a ticket depending on circumstances.

[cowpoos]

Voted.

And have to say I have never issued a ticket to anybody on a passing lane, period.

And can't say I know anybody who has.

Not saying there's not the zealous guy or two that wouldn't ticket in the same circumstances...

the odd one does do it Scummy....we have a passing lane opposite the farm im on...there is often the same highway patrol car parked in one of our farm access ways, under the trees, pointing a gadget out of his window...it always seems to be the same guy...oddly I've talked to him a couple of times when I'm going out that way with some machinery...and he seem like a nice fella??

but also...its the only time I've ever seen a cop praying on passing lanes.

[rastuscat]

the odd one does do it Scummy....we have a passing lane opposite the farm im on...there is often the same highway patrol car parked in one of our farm access ways, under the trees, pointing a gadget out of his window...

Was it a donut maker?????????????


it always seems to be the same guy...oddly I've talked to him a couple of times when I'm going out that way with some machinery...and he seem like a nice fella??

Can't be a real traffic cop............


but also...its the only time I've ever seen a cop praying on passing lanes.

Was he facing Mecca?

[Pseudonym]

I’ve been booked at 112 on a passing lane, I was most pleased…
The upside was now I knew where he was I could have a little fun!
Every cloud and all that…

I think an increased tolerance for passing should be encouraged, but I also think a 20% tolerance across the board would be a good idea so I’m an extremist radical in the eyes of the beige.
What I’d really like to see is an open limit on lonely back roads with a 2-3km lead in to towns where it drops you down to 100 then 80 then 50 as you close in on it.
Where the motorway has a speed limit that fluctuates with peak times and the right hand lane is for passing.

I’d also like to see 13 year olds on 50cc scooters after passing a road test with an experienced instructor all done through their collage.
Only allowed to be on roads with a speed limit of up to 60kph, and a curfew…
Not too different than a push bike (speed wise) but with lights and rego.
That would lead nicely into the compulsory two years on a motorbike!

But all of this would require people to be able to think for themselves and that just isn’t going to happen.
But can you imagine the uproar if it was floated?
The reality is that while there would be losses, and initially they would look quite high if taken out of the overall “shit that happened” statically generated reports, but they shouldn’t be much higher than the usual final score.

Just a personal fantasy.

Anyway, sorry OP I’ve gotten way off topic.

[Jack Miller]

the odd one does do it Scummy....we have a passing lane opposite the farm im on...there is often the same highway patrol car parked in one of our farm access ways, under the trees, pointing a gadget out of his window...it always seems to be the same guy...oddly I've talked to him a couple of times when I'm going out that way with some machinery...and he seem like a nice fella??

Actions speak louder than words. He's not a nice fella. If you tell me the road I'll set him up to give me a ticket, just need to find someone willing to play the part of impeder, any volunteers? He won't know what hit him.

Acquittal* number four coming up.:woohoo:

____________________
*Sorry rustascat, whatever the correct word is. Might be an actual acquittal this time anyway, if he & his bosses are mad enough to take it all the way.

[Jack Miller]

I’ve been booked at 112 on a passing lane, I was most pleased…
The upside was now I knew where he was I could have a little fun!
...
Anyway, sorry OP I’ve gotten way off topic.

No problem, tell us about the fun you had with him.

[scumdog]

the odd one does do it Scummy....we have a passing lane opposite the farm im on...there is often the same highway patrol car parked in one of our farm access ways, under the trees, pointing a gadget out of his window...it always seems to be the same guy...oddly I've talked to him a couple of times when I'm going out that way with some machinery...and he seem like a nice fella??

but also...its the only time I've ever seen a cop praying on passing lanes.

Was he actually writing out tickets?

Or just doing a survey on speeds in that area?

Not sticking up for him but i've known guys to have been directed to record speed for a certain time/area but not ticket anybody.

And to try and remain out of sight so as not to create a false sense that speeds are low in the area when everybody who spots them slows down.

[rastuscat]

Was he actually writing out tickets?

Or just doing a survey on speeds in that area?

Not sticking up for him but i've known guys to have been directed to record speed for a certain time/area but not ticket anybody.

Yeah I'm sure he was surveying speeds. I expect he was handing personal questionnaires to people who went too fast, and charged them a fee for their input, proportional to their speed.

:shit:

[rastuscat]

Actions speak louder than words. He's not a nice fella. If you tell me the road I'll set him up to give me a ticket, just need to find someone willing to play the part of impeder, any volunteers? He won't know what hit him.

Acquittal* number four coming up.:woohoo:

____________________
*Sorry rustascat, whatever the correct word is. Might be an actual acquittal this time anyway, if he & his bosses are mad enough to take it all the way.

Hey Jacko

Here's a challenge, you and I should catch up, and I'll loan you a bike to speed on. I'll then write you a ticket, and the challenge is on !! Lets go to court and see who wins !!

Funny thing is, I actually care more about people complying than playing the sometimes silly court game. So if you don't come down and speed I've won anyway !!

Seriously tho, I saw a bloke go through a red light today. He and I had a hearty discussion during which it was clear to me that he actually believed it wasn't red. It must be a shit of a thing, being accused of something you are convinced you didn't do. Thing is, we act on what we see, so he got the ticket anyway. It truly must be hard.

:shutup:

[ducatilover]

Hey Jacko

Here's a challenge, you and I should catch up, and I'll loan you a bike to speed on. I'll then write you a ticket, and the challenge is on !! Lets go to court and see who wins !!



I'll watch and warm doughnuts :yes:

[rastuscat]

I'll watch and warm doughnuts :yes:

Cool, I was thinking of getting a donut sponsor.

[ducatilover]

Cool, I was thinking of getting a donut sponsor.

I can probably help out, I'm nice like that.

[rastuscat]

Back on topic, I note that the thread started as a discussion on the exercise of discretion. There appears to be an impression that exercising discretion means giving a warning.

Now, I have consulted with the interweb, and find that discretion is The ability to make decisions which represent a responsible choice and for which an understanding of what is lawful, right or wise may be presupposed. see Websters Third New International Dictionary (unabridged)

Nowhere does it say choosing not to take action. It says considering the options, and choosing one. So, I can consider all the options and exercise my discretion by choosing to write a ticket.

Just a thought.

[ducatilover]

Back on topic, I note that the thread started as a discussion on the exercise of discretion. There appears to be an impression that exercising discretion means giving a warning.

Now, I have consulted with the interweb, and find that discretion is The ability to make decisions which represent a responsible choice and for which an understanding of what is lawful, right or wise may be presupposed. see Websters Third New International Dictionary (unabridged)

Nowhere does it say choosing not to take action. It says considering the options, and choosing one. So, I can consider all the options and exercise my discretion by choosing to write a ticket.

Just a thought.
I'd say you're probably on to it when it comes to discretion

[rastuscat]

I'd say you're probably on to it when it comes to discretion

Ta for that. Thought I was going mad.

Exercised my discretion several times today, wrote tickets.

Lots of cellphone use out there folks, watch out for the distracted idiot who might nudge you without knowing you are there.

[scumdog]

Back on topic, I note that the thread started as a discussion on the exercise of discretion. There appears to be an impression that exercising discretion means giving a warning.

Now, I have consulted with the interweb, and find that discretion is The ability to make decisions which represent a responsible choice and for which an understanding of what is lawful, right or wise may be presupposed. see Websters Third New International Dictionary (unabridged)

Nowhere does it say choosing not to take action. It says considering the options, and choosing one. So, I can consider all the options and exercise my discretion by choosing to write a ticket.

Just a thought.

Damn tootin' right.

What some think 'discreton' means:
I don't care what the cop thinks I did, I don't think it I should get a ticket".

[Jack Miller]

Back on topic, I note that the thread started as a discussion on the exercise of discretion. There appears to be an impression that exercising discretion means giving a warning.

Now, I have consulted with the interweb, and find that discretion is The ability to make decisions which represent a responsible choice and for which an understanding of what is lawful, right or wise may be presupposed. see Websters Third New International Dictionary (unabridged)

Nowhere does it say choosing not to take action. It says considering the options, and choosing one. So, I can consider all the options and exercise my discretion by choosing to write a ticket.

Just a thought.
So what is it if not "discretion" that causes traffic cops not to take action against people exceeding the speed limit if the amount over is less than the current tolerance? Whatever the answer is, substitute that for discretion in the poll.

[scumdog]

So what is it if not "discretion" that causes traffic cops not to take action against people exceeding the speed limit if the amount over is less than the current tolerance? Whatever the answer is, substitute that for discretion in the poll.


You mean you can get a ticket for less than the current tolerance?

Must be bad kharma for that dude if he gets a ticket.:shutup:

[cowpoos]

Was he actually writing out tickets?

Or just doing a survey on speeds in that area?

Not sticking up for him but i've known guys to have been directed to record speed for a certain time/area but not ticket anybody.

And to try and remain out of sight so as not to create a false sense that speeds are low in the area when everybody who spots them slows down.

well...you may be right...I don't actually remember him pulling anyone.

[Jack Miller]

You mean you can get a ticket for less than the current tolerance?
No, that's not what I mean.

[ducatilover]

You mean you can get a ticket for less than the current tolerance?


Wouldn't that be a great thing?

[Parlane]

Hey Jacko

Here's a challenge, you and I should catch up, and I'll loan you a bike to speed on. I'll then write you a ticket, and the challenge is on !! Lets go to court and see who wins !!

Funny thing is, I actually care more about people complying than playing the sometimes silly court game. So if you don't come down and speed I've won anyway !!

Seriously tho, I saw a bloke go through a red light today. He and I had a hearty discussion during which it was clear to me that he actually believed it wasn't red. It must be a shit of a thing, being accused of something you are convinced you didn't do. Thing is, we act on what we see, so he got the ticket anyway. It truly must be hard.

:shutup:

My mate got hit by a rav4 last tuesday who went through a red light :( He was on his work scooter. My friend went through the guys windscreen helmet first, and then the buckle broke and his face hit the pavement after he came off the bonnet. :angry:

[FJRider]

So what is it if not "discretion" that causes traffic cops not to take action against people exceeding the speed limit if the amount over is less than the current tolerance? Whatever the answer is, substitute that for discretion in the poll.

TOLERANCE is NOT law ... get over it ...

IGNORANCE of the laws you find unconvenient will ALWAYS attract the attention of Plod .... eventually ... some get lucky and don't ... some ... just run out of luck ...

ARROGANCE of the motorist in assuming cops HAVE to give "tolerance"... Discretion is NOT automatic lessoning of charges ... or lessoning of fine amounts ... just THEIR choice to take what THEY believe their actions should be ... Such is life ...

STUPIDITY of some ... who attempt to defend their "right" of tolerance ... regardless of the circumstances ... that led to their driving/riding style, that attracted the attention of said Plod ... and insist THEIR opinion of the law as THEY think it should be ... should be applied to THEM ... THERE AND THEN ...

The "Attitude test" pass MAY help ... but not always ... GET OVER IT ...

My experience has proved ... it's worked more often than NOT ...

[yachtie10]

TOLERANCE is NOT law ... get over it ...

IGNORANCE of the laws you find unconvenient will ALWAYS attract the attention of Plod .... eventually ... some get lucky and don't ... some ... just run out of luck ...

ARROGANCE of the motorist in assuming cops HAVE to give "tolerance"... Discretion is NOT automatic lessoning of charges ... or lessoning of fine amounts ... just THEIR choice to take what THEY believe their actions should be ... Such is life ...

STUPIDITY of some ... who attempt to defend their "right" of tolerance ... regardless of the circumstances ... that led to their driving/riding style, that attracted the attention of said Plod ... and insist THEIR opinion of the law as THEY think it should be ... should be applied to THEM ... THERE AND THEN ...

The "Attitude test" pass MAY help ... but not always ... GET OVER IT ...

My experience has proved ... it's worked more often than NOT ...

what a intolerant post

[ducatilover]

what a intolerant post

"An".

This is a properly intolerant post.

I agree with FJrider.

[Berries]

I agree with FJrider.
I think you MEANT that YOU.... agree with FJrider.

[ducatilover]

I think you MEANT that YOU.... agreewith FJrider.

I said that.


I think.

[rastuscat]

I think.

STOP THAT!!

:Police:This is KB.

[FJRider]

what a intolerant post

Tolerance should be treated like a Christmas present ... getting any ... is better than not getting any .... and depending how "good" you've been ... :shutup:

[Parlane]

Tolerance should be treated like a Christmas present ... getting any ... is better than not getting any .... and depending how "good" you've been ... :shutup:

So that's why I've been getting coal instead of tickets? I better make sure I stay naughty then.

[Scuba_Steve]

Lots of cellphone use out there folks, watch out for the distracted idiot who might nudge you without knowing you are there.

Yea that new law has made those people more dangerous than ever

[Parlane]

Yea that new law has made those people more dangerous than ever

Yep, now I have to hide my phone on my lap when I'm texting. And trust me, it's not easy with a touch screen!

Hint: keep an ipod with you, and then say you were changing the music. No laws against ipods! :facepalm:

[Jack Miller]

Back on topic, I note that the thread started as a discussion on the exercise of discretion. There appears to be an impression that exercising discretion means giving a warning.

No, what I'm talking is the fact that cops simply let people past with no interference at all, hell we might not even see you or know that you measured our speed, if the speed, while technically illegally over the speed limit, is less than the current enforcement tolerance. No ticket, no warning, no nothing. Perhaps "discretion" is the wrong word. How do you describe this within the force?

[Zedder]

Back on topic, I note that the thread started as a discussion on the exercise of discretion. There appears to be an impression that exercising discretion means giving a warning.

Now, I have consulted with the interweb, and find that discretion is The ability to make decisions which represent a responsible choice and for which an understanding of what is lawful, right or wise may be presupposed. see Websters Third New International Dictionary (unabridged)

Nowhere does it say choosing not to take action. It says considering the options, and choosing one. So, I can consider all the options and exercise my discretion by choosing to write a ticket.

Just a thought.

Perhaps when you were consulting the interweb you should have looked under discretion in the Criminal Justice system.

There are several references to just giving a warning and not taking any action.

Don't take this the wrong way, but should a member of the Police have to use the interweb to get clarification on this?

[rastuscat]

Perhaps when you were consulting the interweb you should have looked under discretion in the Criminal Justice system.

There are several references to just giving a warning and not taking any action.

Don't take this the wrong way, but should a member of the Police have to use the interweb to get clarification on this?

The general Popo view on discretion is that it means not prosecuting.

My personal view is that it means considering all the options, and making a subjective but balanced judgement. Of course, not everyone will agree, and if I use my discretion and write a ticket, some people will always tell me I should have used my discretion (their definition being Don't Write The Ticket), when in fact I have. The fact that it's called MY DISCRETION means that it's mine to consider and decide on.

Semantics really. I raised it as my view tends to be different from the general one.

[Zedder]

The general Popo view on discretion is that it means not prosecuting.

My personal view is that it means considering all the options, and making a subjective but balanced judgement. Of course, not everyone will agree, and if I use my discretion and write a ticket, some people will always tell me I should have used my discretion (their definition being Don't Write The Ticket), when in fact I have. The fact that it's called MY DISCRETION means that it's mine to consider and decide on.

Semantics really. I raised it as my view tends to be different from the general one.

You wrote "Nowhere on the web" does it say anthing about discretion meaning take no action.

I've already proved that wrong. There are indeed references to criminal law which is more relevant to your job as a police officer than your personal thoughts.

Therefore, you are going against NZ criminal law and the police approved discretionary process by using personal feeling to give people tickets in the first instance.

You're bleedin' nicked mate!

[oneofsix]

You wrote "Nowhere on the web" does it say anthing about discretion meaning take no action.

I've already proved that wrong. There are indeed references to criminal law which is more relevant to your job as a police officer than your personal thoughts.

Therefore, you are going against NZ criminal law and the police approved discretionary process by using personal feeling to give people tickets in the first instance.

You're bleedin' nicked mate!

This could be good :corn:

[Ender EnZed]

This could be good :corn:

Do you think he'll take it international?

[scumdog]

You wrote "Nowhere on the web" does it say anthing about discretion meaning take no action.

I've already proved that wrong. There are indeed references to criminal law which is more relevant to your job as a police officer than your personal thoughts.

Therefore, you are going against NZ criminal law and the police approved discretionary process by using personal feeling to give people tickets in the first instance.

You're bleedin' nicked mate!

Mwahsha!

Who gives a fucj - you'll never know why/why not you got discretion.

Anyway, it shouldn't be allowed - who made the cop judge-jury-and-executioner anyway???

"Book 'im Danno, murder 1."

[Zedder]

Mwahsha!

Who gives a fucj - you'll never know why/why not you got discretion.

Anyway, it shouldn't be allowed - who made the cop judge-jury-and-executioner anyway???

"Book 'im Danno, murder 1."

Post something when you've sobered up a bit and can write coherently.

[scumdog]

Post something when you've sobered up a bit and can write coherently.

Just trying to post in 'KB-speak', sorry.:blink:

[Zedder]

Two more posts and I get a toaster.

[Oblivion]

Two more posts and I get a toaster.

Mine must be lost in the mail. :facepalm:

[Zedder]

Mine must be lost in the mail. :facepalm:

No, that's what you're meant to tell the cops about where you're licence is.

[Zedder]

Mine must be lost in the mail. :facepalm:

No, that's what you're meant to tell the cops about where your licence is.

[Gearup]

The general Popo view on discretion is that it means not prosecuting.

My personal view is that it means considering all the options, and making a subjective but balanced judgement. Of course, not everyone will agree, and if I use my discretion and write a ticket, some people will always tell me I should have used my discretion (their definition being Don't Write The Ticket), when in fact I have. The fact that it's called MY DISCRETION means that it's mine to consider and decide on.

Semantics really. I raised it as my view tends to be different from the general one.

Sounds like a load of crap to me.

[FJRider]

Sounds like a load of crap to me.

You would know ... you're full of it ...

Discretion is also getting a "ticket" for exceeding the posted speed limit ... rather than the 125 km/hr ... you were actually doing ...

As opposed to no discretion .... $$$$$$$$$$$$

YOUR choice too ... just pass the attitude test !!!! (Not always a guaranteed win) ... but at those times ... you have more to lose than GAIN ...

Think about it ....

[Gearup]

You would know ... you're full of it ...

Discretion is also getting a "ticket" for exceeding the posted speed limit ... rather than the 125 km/hr ... you were actually doing ...

As opposed to no discretion .... $$$$$$$$$$$$

YOUR choice too ... just pass the attitude test !!!! (Not always a guaranteed win) ... but at those times ... you have more to lose than GAIN ...

Think about it ....

I suggest you look up discretion under criminal law like zedder did before you go mouthing off as usual.

[Gearup]

You would know ... you're full of it ...

Discretion is also getting a "ticket" for exceeding the posted speed limit ... rather than the 125 km/hr ... you were actually doing ...

As opposed to no discretion .... $$$$$$$$$$$$

YOUR choice too ... just pass the attitude test !!!! (Not always a guaranteed win) ... but at those times ... you have more to lose than GAIN ...

Think about it ....

Look up discretion under criminal law before you go ranting on.

[Gearup]

Just trying to post in 'KB-speak', sorry.:blink:

Get a grip.

[FJRider]

Post something when you've sobered up a bit and can write coherently.

I've been reading all YOUR posts :sick: ... and have come to the same conclusion ... :facepalm:

Time to up youre game I reckon ... :yes:

[scumdog]

Sounds like a load of crap to me.

Ah well, that's life..suck it up baby....

[scumdog]

Get a grip.

Make me, bitch.

[FJRider]

I suggest you look up discretion under criminal law like zedder did before you go mouthing off as usual.

NO ... YOU look it up in the dictionary ...

[Zedder]

I've been reading all YOUR posts :sick: ... and have come to the same conclusion ... :facepalm:

Time to up youre game I reckon ... :yes:

Time of the month dear?

[FJRider]

Look up discretion under criminal law before you go ranting on.

And I suggest you stop DOUBLE POSTING ... We put up with enough of your waffle as it is ... :whocares:

[crystalball]

:innocent: My last ticket was over 9 or 10 yrs ago. :yes: Last time I was told of was by a coppa on the MW doin a up and down wave signal as I was lane splitting. So I slowed down and he gave me a smile and nod lol. Hope it will allways be like that :love:

[FJRider]

Time of the month dear?

Sure is fella ... and the moment you live in has gone ... get a life ...

[Gearup]

And I suggest you stop DOUBLE POSTING ... We put up with enough of your waffle as it is ... :whocares:

My apologies to you and your boyfriend scumdog.

[scumdog]

My apologies to you and your boyfriend scumdog.


Stick your stinking apology right up your stinking fucking arse.

It might (I said MIGHT) just stop the shit you spouting from getting onto my screen.

Have a nice day.

[Kickaha]

Stick your stinking apology right up your stinking fucking arse.

It might (I said MIGHT) just stop the shit you spouting from getting onto my screen.

Have a nice day.

Ah fuck, he's on the whiskey again

[scumdog]

Ah fuck, he's on the whiskey again

Hell no - not a drop.

Wait until I start...

[FJRider]

Ah fuck, he's on the whiskey again

He's not the only one ... :killingme

[Gearup]

Stick your stinking apology right up your stinking fucking arse.

It might (I said MIGHT) just stop the shit you spouting from getting onto my screen.

Have a nice day.

It's nighttime dipstick.

[scumdog]

It's nighttime dipstick.

Sorry.

I withdraw my offer...have a crappy night.

[Jack Miller]

...YOUR choice too ... just pass the attitude test !!!! (Not always a guaranteed win) ... but at those times ... you have more to lose than GAIN ...
Think about it ....
What is this "Attitude Test?"

[FJRider]

It's nighttime dipstick.

Open your eyes ... it may get brighter then ... :innocent:

[scumdog]

What is this "Attitude Test?"


The one that failure is rewarded by inconvenience and unwanted but preventable expense.


Or something like that:blink:

[FJRider]

What is this "Attitude Test?"

A quote from one who knows the answer to it all ...


I suggest you look up "attitude test" under criminal law like zedder did before you go mouthing off as usual.

[Gearup]

The one that failure is rewarded by inconvenience and unwanted but preventable expense.


Or something like that:blink:

You still here?

[rastuscat]

Alternately, try the Altitude test.

The higher you get, the higher the fine.

Yo Scummy, naked again yet?

[scumdog]

You still here?

Who said that??:scratch:

[FJRider]

You still here?

honda riders ... :shutup:

Is this thread in PD yet ... :innocent:

[Gearup]

A quote from one who knows the answer to it all ...

What are you afraid of? Learning something?

[rastuscat]

What is this "Attitude Test?"

You already failed it, sorry. No retest available.

[FJRider]

What are you afraid of? Learning something?

I KNOW IT ALL ... and I'm not scared of you ... :woohoo:

[bogan]

So while we have a few cops in-thread, and nothing much on-topic anyway.

What is the story with people doing burnouts on their driveways? All good as it's private property? or noise complaint? or pollution.....

[crystalball]

So while we have a few cops in-thread, and nothing much on-topic anyway.

What is the story with people doing burnouts on their driveways? All good as it's private property? or noise complaint? or pollution.....

year probably be noise complaint and if near footpath be danger to public.

[Zedder]

You already failed it, sorry. No retest available.

So rtc what about discretion as it applies to criminal law and the NZ police?

[FJRider]

So while we have a few cops in-thread, and nothing much on-topic anyway.

What is the story with people doing burnouts on their driveways? All good as it's private property? or noise complaint? or pollution.....

If it's a holden being used (barely capable anyway) ... no problem ....

But any form of abuse is frowned on ... regardless if it's justly deserved/warranted ...

[bogan]

If it's a holden being used (barely capable anyway) ... no problem ....

But any form of abuse is frowned on ... regardless if it's justly deserved/warranted ...

Yeh Holdens have the issue of dropping oil and shrapnel too, wouldn't want to go there.

Not really abuse, especially if you have a very worn tyre, less weight, and more power than stock.

And a clip just for good measure :innocent:
<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qFw-70QwtBc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Gearup]

If it's a holden being used (barely capable anyway) ... no problem ....

But any form of abuse is frowned on ... regardless if it's justly deserved/warranted ...

Oh I get it, my humblest apologies for winding you up sir I did not know you were a member of the police force.

[Zedder]

Are you there rtc? The discretion thing remember?

[FJRider]

Oh I get it, my humblest apologies for winding you up sir I did not know you were a member of the police force.

The saddest time in life ... is finding out how little you know ... :gob:

compared to how much you thought you knew ... :shutup:

[rastuscat]

Are you there rtc? The discretion thing remember?

Sorry, been busy processing a drink driver........exercised my discretion, sending her to court.

[FJRider]

Are you there rtc? The discretion thing remember?

Look it up in the dictionary .... or GOOGLE it ... :sunny:

Would you believe what he tells you anyway ... ??? ... he's a plod ... :corn:

[Gearup]

The saddest time in life ... is finding out how little you know ... :gob:

compared to how much you thought you knew ... :shutup:

You're really not good on picking up on sarcasm are you?

[FJRider]

You're really not good on picking up on sarcasm are you?

You dont learn fast ... or listen to what you've been told either ... :lol:


AND ... it would seem ...

Neither do YOU ...

[steve_t]

Sorry, been busy processing a drink driver........exercised my discretion, sending her to court.

LOL. Gold :sunny:

[Zedder]

Look it up in the dictionary .... or GOOGLE it ... :sunny:

Would you believe what he tells you anyway ... ??? ... he's a plod ... :corn:

I've done all the necessary looking up.

I'll listen to anyone if they're reasonable (you guys haven't cornered the market on the attitude test) and can back up their statements. It's nothing to do with the fact that he's a plod.

[Zedder]

So exactly how many cops are there on here at present then?

[FJRider]

I've done all the necessary looking up.

And you still need to ask ... :facepalm:


I'll listen to anyone if they're reasonable (you guys haven't cornered the market on the attitude test) and can back up their statements. It's nothing to do with the fact that he's a plod.

It's the BEING resonable when you've been "stopped" that is the key ... if not essence ... of the whole subject ...

[Jack Miller]

You already failed it, sorry. No retest available.

Who passes?

[FJRider]

Who passes?

Thats up to the discretion of plod ...

Funny how it's a simple test ... but the simple FAIL ... :killingme

[Zedder]

And you still need to ask ... :facepalm:


It's the BEING resonable when you've been "stopped" that is the key ... if not essence ... of the whole subject ...

I just wanted rtcs answer, clarification of statements he made after new information came to hand that's all. Unfortunately something I wrote wound you up and it got a bit silly.

[FJRider]

So exactly how many cops are there on here at present then?

How long is a piece of string ... :whocares:

guess away ... it may be the first thing you get right ... :facepalm:

then again ... :blink:

[FJRider]

Time of the month dear?

Silly ... mmmmmm :lol:

[Zedder]

Silly ... mmmmmm :lol:

As I said you guys haven't cornered the market on the attitude test. What did you expect me to do?

[FJRider]

As I said you guys haven't cornered the market on the attitude test. What did you expect me to do?

There's no market for attitude .... thats why it's given back ....

listen to those that know ... it WILL save you LOTS of money ... and quite a few demerits ... :woohoo:

[Jack Miller]

Thats up to the discretion of plod ...

My guess who passes: Obsequious sycophants, right rtc?

[FJRider]

My guess who passes: Obsequious sycophants, right rtc?

If it saves me $$$$ ... and 25 demerits ... I'll be one too ... :shutup:

[Zedder]

There's no market for attitude .... thats why it's given back ....

listen to those that know ... it WILL save you LOTS of money ... and quite a few demerits ... :woohoo:

Ok, I'm totally into passing the attitude test.

The other point, was about rtcs personal discretion rather than the normal police line. He did admit that he's more inclined to take enforcement action rather than a warning like others. It just seemed a bit harsh to me and others.

[FJRider]

Ok, I'm totally into passing the attitude test.

Good to hear ...

The other point, was about rtcs personal discretion rather than the normal police line. He did admit that he's more inclined to take enforcement action rather than a warning like others. It just seemed a bit harsh to me and others.

That is HIS discretion ... And the "attitude test" is not required by law ... to ALWAYS be given ... for that matter ... if at all ... :whocares:

such is life .... :yes:

[Berries]

Well this thread has turned to shit.

Attitude test? From what I have read on KB Jack, I can pretty much guarantee you'd fail it. Especially if anywhere near a passing lane.

[rastuscat]

The other point, was about rtcs personal discretion rather than the normal police line. He did admit that he's more inclined to take enforcement action rather than a warning like others.

For the record, I am known down here as having a more down to earth attitude to road safety than most.

If somebody does something that can be fixed, I would rather it was fixed than ticketed. Like, WoF, reg, some licence things, I'd rather they were sorted than ticketed.

There's a national compliance policy, but mine is far more generous than the national one. I would rather someone went and got the appropriate licence than paid the fine, then went and got the licence anyway. Like, we don't get the fine money, so why would I care if the ticket is written. Tickets are about compliance.

What I don't give warnings for are seatbelts, traffic lights, cellphones, things proven to contribute to trauma. Like, I see someone driving without a seatbelt, they say it's the first time ever, I say yeah right, and write the ticket.

So, as with most things, different folk have different tolerances for certain things.

I tolerate the shite talked on here, doesn't that say something?

[Jack Miller]

If it saves me $$$$ ... and 25 demerits ... I'll be one too ... :shutup:

But it won't make any difference. It's all up to Rastuscat's "discretion," which means choosing to write a ticket.

[Zedder]

For the record, I am known down here as having a more down to earth attitude to road safety than most.

If somebody does something that can be fixed, I would rather it was fixed than ticketed. Like, WoF, reg, some licence things, I'd rather they were sorted than ticketed.

There's a national compliance policy, but mine is far more generous than the national one. I would rather someone went and got the appropriate licence than paid the fine, then went and got the licence anyway. Like, we don't get the fine money, so why would I care if the ticket is written. Tickets are about compliance.

What I don't give warnings for are seatbelts, traffic lights, cellphones, things proven to contribute to trauma. Like, I see someone driving without a seatbelt, they say it's the first time ever, I say yeah right, and write the ticket.

So, as with most things, different folk have different tolerances for certain things.

I tolerate the shite talked on here, doesn't that say something?

Thanks for the clarification rtc.

Your earlier posts had come across differently and it appeared you were twisting facts in your favour that's all.

In these days of incorrect behaviour by some in positions of authority it's important to be able to have faith that things are being done well.

Putting up with "the shite" is your discretion.

Cheers.

[FJRider]

But it won't make any difference. It's all up to Rastuscat's "discretion," which means choosing to write a ticket.

That is his discretion .... but it's not often I'm in his turf .... although I may be soon ... :whocares:

Perhaps ... I may try to get his attention ... and test his discretion .... :innocent:

I shall report my findings ... :yes:

[FJRider]

Well this thread has turned to shit.

When it's stirred so well ... it's bound to get messy ... :innocent:

[Jack Miller]

Well this thread has turned to shit.
True, but the result is pretty conclusive. Just about everyone (87% of KiwiBikers who voted) thinks the tolerance should be higher in passing lanes. The resident declared cops have said they usually turn a blind eye. It is obvious that any cops who do ticket in passing lanes (especially any who fish there deliberately) are misbehaving and fully deserve all the bad attitude, aggression, punishment and / or legal difficulties we, and their colleagues who's reputations they harm, can throw at them.

The thread has served it's purpose. Thanks to all.

[Berries]

Just about everyone (87% of KiwiBikers) who voted thinks the tolerance should be higher in passing lanes.
Fixed that for you. While 87% sounds pretty good 50 people is hardly the start of a movement.

[rastuscat]

It is obvious that any cops who do ticket in passing lanes (especially any who fish there deliberately) are complete arseholes and fully deserve all the bad attitude, aggression, punishment and / or legal difficulties we, and their colleagues who's reputations they harm, can throw at them..

For the record, I'm in the close my eyes category you extoll as above. But........

Complete arseholes? Really? That sort of comment merely serves to underline the reason why you have conflict with Popos; it's you that's the problem, not them. It's why you have failed the attitude test, which you didn't even know existed.


The thread has served it's purpose. Thanks to all.

Only if the purpose was to clog the internet and allow people to vent pointlessly. It was a pointless thread, but I've come to expect no less of you.

Harumph.

[rastuscat]

While 87% sounds pretty good 50 people is hardly the start of a movement.

Jack never let the facts stand in the way of a good half-truth.

[Littleman]

Jack never let the facts stand in the way of a good half-truth.

Jack has an agenda.

He'll take whatever support he can get.

Bless him.

[FJRider]

Jack never let the facts stand in the way of a good half-truth.

It's not even half-way to a half truth .... :shutup:

[BMWST?]

i dont expect any discretion.The speed limit is 100 ks which i regularly exceed in a passing lane.

[rastuscat]

i dont expect any discretion.The speed limit is 100 ks which i regularly exceed in a passing lane.

Bless you my son, for your application of a large modicum of common sense.

Don't expect discretion. If you do and you don't get it you'll be bitter. If you don't expect it and you get it, life is good.

My work here is done.

[Jack Miller]

Fixed that for you. While 87% sounds pretty good 50 people is hardly the start of a movement.

Thanks Berries. You are correct and I've edited the original post as you suggest. It is a relatively small sample size and if the result was closer to 50:50 would be quite meaningless in the scheme of things. However, 87% of even a small sample means more than nothing. It'd be worth taking the poll to a larger audience. In the meantime, I still think we have learned something useful.

[Jack Miller]

Complete arseholes? Really?Harumph.

You're correct, the wording was unnecessarily provocative & I've amended the original post.

How would you describe your colleagues who target in these circumstances?

[rastuscat]

You're correct, the wording was unnecessarily provocative & I've amended the original post.

How would you describe your colleagues who target in these circumstances?

I actually agree with you that those who target passing lanes for speed bring a degree of disrepute to the rest of us. It was your description that cheesed me off. I know some cops who have been abused and bashed over the years, and you calling for them to deserved aggression was a bit over the top.

I'd describe them as officers who need to go find a bigger problem, as there are plenty out there.

As previously mentioned, I think there are other big issues that we need to deal with, but I'm a small cog in a big machine, and I can't change the machine much.

Have a bad night before posting that nasty comment? Hope things have settled down. The sun is shining, lets get out and ride.

[Parlane]

The sun is shining, lets get out and ride.

Careful if you plan on riding to Hanmer... On the way back home yesterday I saw 4 speed traps... 4... That's 1 for every 35km.

[Zedder]

I actually agree with you that those who target passing lanes for speed bring a degree of disrepute to the rest of us. It was your description that cheesed me off. I know some cops who have been abused and bashed over the years, and you calling for them to deserved aggression was a bit over the top.

I'd describe them as officers who need to go find a bigger problem, as there are plenty out there.

As previously mentioned, I think there are other big issues that we need to deal with, but I'm a small cog in a big machine, and I can't change the machine much.

Have a bad night before posting that nasty comment? Hope things have settled down. The sun is shining, lets get out and ride.

Well said.

[Zedder]

Careful if you plan on riding to Hanmer... On the way back home yesterday I saw 4 speed traps... 4... That's 1 for every 35km.

1 for every 35kms, that's ok then, it takes my bike 15 kms to get to 100kph.

[Jack Miller]

1 for every 35kms, that's ok then, it takes my bike 15 kms to get to 100kph.

Does that mean you'll pass the first one at 100 and the second at 200?

[Zedder]

Does that mean you'll pass the first one at 100 and the second at 200?

Now, now Jack.....

[scumdog]

Careful if you plan on riding to Hanmer... On the way back home yesterday I saw 4 speed traps... 4... That's 1 for every 35km.

So?

It's rarely the ones you see that get you.:yes:

[Parlane]

So?

It's rarely the ones you see that get you.:yes:

I didn't see any of them.. hence speed traps. Otherwise, I'd have called them pulled over patrol cars.

[James Deuce]

So?

It's rarely the ones you see that get you.:yes:

Shhhhh - Don't engage! He's immortal, invulnerable, invincible and indubitably correct in all of his assumptions about How Things Work (™).

[scumdog]

I didn't see any of them.. hence speed traps. Otherwise, I'd have called them pulled over patrol cars.

E.S.P. huh?

Wierd. :blink:

Or did you rely on your electomic detector thingy?

If so the same rule applies re the ones you don't 'see'.

[FJRider]

Shhhhh - Don't engage! He's immortal, invulnerable, invincible and indubitably correct in all of his assumptions about How Things Work (™).

He rides a Harley ... so ... he must have a sense of humor ... :innocent:

[rastuscat]

I didn't see any of them.. hence speed traps. Otherwise, I'd have called them pulled over patrol cars.

It's a common thing that. To assume that coz you didn't see something it must have been hidden.

More like you failed to keep a good enough lookout.

Or like a car driver who says the he didn't see you so you must have been going too fast.

Easy to blame someone else, instead of manning up and accepting that you missed the obvious.

For six weeks I ran the HP section that works SH7 and SH7A. The section started hammering that road as part of Operation Jasmine, our response to the number of deaths on that road.

No passing lanes for Jack to bitch about up there, well, maybe one, at Mouse Point. Plenty of places to pass tho.

Ride at or about the speed limit and you'll never have to worry about radar traps (or piss poor observation) again.

So there.

[scumdog]

Ride at or about the speed limit and you'll never have to worry about radar traps (or piss poor observation) again.

So there.
Far-out rastuscat, THAT is not the 'KB way'

The KB way is to ride as fast as ya feel like (bein' an exceptional rider an' all m'lud) and then scream yer heart out on KB how you got caught by the revenue gatherers - and think people care.

Oh my, how I laugh at that, somebody else has been paying MY share of the revenue since 1987...:woohoo:

[Scuba_Steve]

Oh my, how I laugh at that, somebody else has been paying MY share of the revenue since 1987...:woohoo:

Well do ya wanna start paying mine then??? Think my oldest is 4-5yrs now. I'm sure the Govt would quite like to start receiving the fruits of their scam regardless of how old it is, and if you won't pay it no-one will.

[Jack Miller]

like a car driver who says the he didn't see you so you must have been going too fast.

when really he didn't see you because his newish car has huge thick A pillars that contain air bags and block his view.

[lesley]

Dear Jack et all
I came across your interesting discussion recently when I was researching speed enforcement in passing lanes. The reason I am researching this subject is because I got issued with a speeding infringement at 9.00pm one Sunday night on SH2 near Maramarua, whilst I was enroute from Wellington-Auckland. It was a dark wet night and I was tired from my long drive, so for most of my journey I was well under the speed limits. However, when I got to the passing lane in question, I was forced to speed up to avoid collison with the truck/trailer I was passing. I didn't realise the lane was about to end because the 'passing land ending' sign on the left of the road was obscured by the truck and there was no sign errected on the other side of the road (as is now required by law). At 100 kph on a wet road, there was no option to slow down or stop to let the truck merge in front of me, because the merge was imminent and the vehicle I was overtaking was too long. Consequently, I was obliged to increase my speed to allegedly 128 kph to avoid collison with the truck. The officer who issued me with the ticket was parked up with his stalker radar on in a side street within 250 metres of the passing lane ending. I didn't see him at that time, but received written confirmation from him later of his whereabouts. On a wet Sunday night, when there are few cars on the road and little for a country cop to do, I have no doubt he was only there for tax collection purposes and not road safety, which is wholly unethical.

I was aggrieved to receive an infringement in these circumstances and wrote to NZ Police requesting it cancel the infringement. The response I received from the Adjudication Manager refused to waive the infringement without reason. I also received a letter from the officer involved, advising me that Speed Enforcement Guide doesn't apply to Stalker Radar which I found rather perplexing because this code specifically relates to: "Speed measuring devices (including but not limited to speedometers, laser and radar devies) are, if operated in or from a vehicle, only to be operated from vehicles owned or operated by NZ Police" .

I have opted in public interest to have this matter determined by a court. I can't afford lawyers and have little respect for most anyway, so I will be representing myself at the hearings, which have been set down for Huntly District Court commencing on 21 February 2011.

I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions about what strategies I can utilise in my defense of this matter and would also be delighted if other concerned citizens could take the time to attend the hearing.

Cheers, Lesley

[Flip]

Dear Jack et all
I came across your interesting discussion recently when I was researching speed enforcement in passing lanes. The reason I am researching this subject is because I got issued with a speeding infringement at 9.00pm one Sunday night on SH2 near Maramarua, whilst I was enroute from Wellington-Auckland. It was a dark wet night and I was tired from my long drive, so for most of my journey I was well under the speed limits. However, when I got to the passing lane in question, I was forced to speed up to avoid collison with the truck/trailer I was passing. I didn't realise the lane was about to end because the 'passing land ending' sign on the left of the road was obscured by the truck and there was no sign errected on the other side of the road (as is now required by law). At 100 kph on a wet road, there was no option to slow down or stop to let the truck merge in front of me, because the merge was imminent and the vehicle I was overtaking was too long. Consequently, I was obliged to increase my speed to allegedly 128 kph to avoid collison with the truck. The officer who issued me with the ticket was parked up with his stalker radar on in a side street within 250 metres of the passing lane ending. I didn't see him at that time, but received written confirmation from him later of his whereabouts. On a wet Sunday night, when there are few cars on the road and little for a country cop to do, I have no doubt he was only there for tax collection purposes and not road safety, which is wholly unethical.

I was aggrieved to receive an infringement in these circumstances and wrote to NZ Police requesting it cancel the infringement. The response I received from the Adjudication Manager refused to waive the infringement without reason. I also received a letter from the officer involved, advising me that Speed Enforcement Guide doesn't apply to Stalker Radar which I found rather perplexing because this code specifically relates to: "Speed measuring devices (including but not limited to speedometers, laser and radar devies) are, if operated in or from a vehicle, only to be operated from vehicles owned or operated by NZ Police" .

I have opted in public interest to have this matter determined by a court. I can't afford lawyers and have little respect for most anyway, so I will be representing myself at the hearings, which have been set down for Huntly District Court commencing on 21 February 2011.

I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions about what strategies I can utilise in my defense of this matter and would also be delighted if other concerned citizens could take the time to attend the hearing.

Cheers, Lesley

Basically pay up and avoid the court costs.

[nothingflash]

Dear Jack et all
I came across your interesting discussion recently when I was researching speed enforcement in passing lanes. The reason I am researching this subject is because I got issued with a speeding infringement at 9.00pm one Sunday night on SH2 near Maramarua, whilst I was enroute from Wellington-Auckland. It was a dark wet night and I was tired from my long drive, so for most of my journey I was well under the speed limits. However, when I got to the passing lane in question, I was forced to speed up to avoid collison with the truck/trailer I was passing. I didn't realise the lane was about to end because the 'passing land ending' sign on the left of the road was obscured by the truck and there was no sign errected on the other side of the road (as is now required by law). At 100 kph on a wet road, there was no option to slow down or stop to let the truck merge in front of me, because the merge was imminent and the vehicle I was overtaking was too long. Consequently, I was obliged to increase my speed to allegedly 128 kph to avoid collison with the truck. The officer who issued me with the ticket was parked up with his stalker radar on in a side street within 250 metres of the passing lane ending. I didn't see him at that time, but received written confirmation from him later of his whereabouts. On a wet Sunday night, when there are few cars on the road and little for a country cop to do, I have no doubt he was only there for tax collection purposes and not road safety, which is wholly unethical.

I was aggrieved to receive an infringement in these circumstances and wrote to NZ Police requesting it cancel the infringement. The response I received from the Adjudication Manager refused to waive the infringement without reason. I also received a letter from the officer involved, advising me that Speed Enforcement Guide doesn't apply to Stalker Radar which I found rather perplexing because this code specifically relates to: "Speed measuring devices (including but not limited to speedometers, laser and radar devies) are, if operated in or from a vehicle, only to be operated from vehicles owned or operated by NZ Police" .

I have opted in public interest to have this matter determined by a court. I can't afford lawyers and have little respect for most anyway, so I will be representing myself at the hearings, which have been set down for Huntly District Court commencing on 21 February 2011.

I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions about what strategies I can utilise in my defense of this matter and would also be delighted if other concerned citizens could take the time to attend the hearing.

Cheers, Lesley

:yawn::sleep:

[St_Gabriel]

speeding infringement at 9.00pm one Sunday night

It was a dark wet night

I was tired from my long drive

I didn't realise the lane was about to end

my speed to allegedly 128 kph

Now I am the last person who should be talking about speeds/speeding but if the above facts are correct, they being that it was dark, you were tired, and it was an unfamiliar road, was overtaking the truck at that time REALLY WORTH YOUR FUCKING LIFE......

lastly, Slow down Rossi (or whoever the cage equivalent is)

[Jack Miller]

[QUOTEDon't listen to the revenue loving cop sympathizers telling you not to fight back. You have been wronged by an unjust system. If you haven't already found this thread it'll help you a lot:

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/138631-All-charges-dropped

Good luck Any Cop ticketing in a passing lane is pure scum in my opinion and even in the more sympathetic opinion of at least one on-list policeman should be focusing his attention on other issues.

[Berries]

I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions about what strategies I can utilise in my defense of this matter and would also be delighted if other concerned citizens could take the time to attend the hearing.
You didn't lose your licence so I'd recommend you suck it up and move on. Although your comment about lawyers suggests that there may be some history.

Accelerating from 100 to 128km/h in a car. How long does that take ? Over what distance? If the 200m sign was missing on the right how did you know the lane was going to end other than the truck indicating 200m later where the lane actually ended? And being generous 128 is 135 on the clock. In the dark. In the wet. While tired. So while you were "forced" to accelerate to get past you had no idea that there might have been a 65km/h curve at the end of the passing lane? Pity the poor bastard coming the other way.

I think there should be some leeway over strict enforcement of the speed limit in a passing lane, but in those conditions you are taking the piss.

Good luck.

[steve_t]

I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions about what strategies I can utilise in my defense of this matter and would also be delighted if other concerned citizens could take the time to attend the hearing.

Cheers, Lesley

Years ago I got pinged for 114km/h as i sped up at the end of a passing lane because didn't want to merge into the door of the 4WD beside me. I wrote in to explain the situation and to ask for leniency but no dice. $80 and some demerits. As others have said, you've been snapped in the wrong and so you're probably gonna have to deal with the consequences. You can try to write in but I wouldn't expect anything.

[BMWST?]

Dear Jack et all
I came across your interesting discussion recently when I was researching speed enforcement in passing lanes. The reason I am researching this subject is because I got issued with a speeding infringement at 9.00pm one Sunday night on SH2 near Maramarua, whilst I was enroute from Wellington-Auckland. It was a dark wet night and I was tired from my long drive, so for most of my journey I was well under the speed limits. However, when I got to the passing lane in question, I was forced to speed up to avoid collison with the truck/trailer I was passing. I didn't realise the lane was about to end because the 'passing land ending' sign on the left of the road was obscured by the truck and there was no sign errected on the other side of the road (as is now required by law). At 100 kph on a wet road, there was no option to slow down or stop to let the truck merge in front of me, because the merge was imminent and the vehicle I was overtaking was too long. Consequently, I was obliged to increase my speed to allegedly 128 kph to avoid collison with the truck. The officer who issued me with the ticket was parked up with his stalker radar on in a side street within 250 metres of the passing lane ending. I didn't see him at that time, but received written confirmation from him later of his whereabouts. On a wet Sunday night, when there are few cars on the road and little for a country cop to do, I have no doubt he was only there for tax collection purposes and not road safety, which is wholly unethical.

I was aggrieved to receive an infringement in these circumstances and wrote to NZ Police requesting it cancel the infringement. The response I received from the Adjudication Manager refused to waive the infringement without reason. I also received a letter from the officer involved, advising me that Speed Enforcement Guide doesn't apply to Stalker Radar which I found rather perplexing because this code specifically relates to: "Speed measuring devices (including but not limited to speedometers, laser and radar devies) are, if operated in or from a vehicle, only to be operated from vehicles owned or operated by NZ Police" .

I have opted in public interest to have this matter determined by a court. I can't afford lawyers and have little respect for most anyway, so I will be representing myself at the hearings, which have been set down for Huntly District Court commencing on 21 February 2011.

I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions about what strategies I can utilise in my defense of this matter and would also be delighted if other concerned citizens could take the time to attend the hearing.

Cheers, Lesley

Lesley here is a condensed version of what will happen in court.
JUdge Lesley did you exceed 100 km hr
Lesley Yes Sir
Fined .............

[ducatilover]

Dear Jack et all
Bleat and moan.

Cheers, Lesley

So, you pulled out to pass. You're too stupid to judge how fast you need to go to pass the vehicle that is "holding you up" and are incapable of looking ahead.
You nearly have a crash involving a truck, due to your lack of intelligence and stupid passing manoeuvre.
You broke the speed limit.
You're bitching about it.
You think you can accelerate faster than you can slow down? :facepalm:

You didn't have to pass the truck.
You can stop in the wet faster than you can pass a truck.
No-one "forced" you.
You have a problem with getting a speeding ticket, when you were speeding.
Grow up.

You are a dick, get off the roads, you're dangerous.

[Parlane]

You are a dick, get off the roads, you're dangerous.

That's wheelie good advice. :shutup:

[steve_t]

You are a dick, get off the roads, you're dangerous.

A bit harsh on the new girl :corn:

[ducatilover]

That's wheelie good advice. :shutup:
Hahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a

Shhhhh :shifty:


A bit harsh on the new girl :corn:
Should be good for a decent rise out of someone :laugh:

[imdying]

I drive bad,

Cheers, LesleyWait, in a car of a bike? If it was a car...

<img src="http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/Tits-Or-GTFO/1/tits_or_gtfo.jpg" />

[Flip]

Wait, in a car of a bike? If it was a car...

<img src="http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/Tits-Or-GTFO/1/tits_or_gtfo.jpg" />

If it was a bike the rozza would never have got a lock on. A truck has about 50 times the radar signature of a bike.

[PrincessBandit]

Dear Jack et all
..... I got issued with a speeding infringement at 9.00pm one Sunday night on SH2 near Maramarua, .... It was a dark wet night and I was tired from my long drive,................ I was forced to speed up to avoid collison with the truck/trailer I was passing. ........... the merge was imminent and the vehicle I was overtaking was too long. Consequently, I was obliged to increase my speed to allegedly 128 kph to avoid collison with the truck.

........... I will be representing myself at the hearings, which have been set down for Huntly District Court commencing on 21 February 2011. Been and gone, that date...

I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions about what strategies I can utilise in my defense of this matter and would also be delighted if other concerned citizens could take the time to attend the hearing.

Cheers, Lesley

Oh dear, and you chose to do that on one of the most notorious stretches of road you could have picked? I'm all for saying that roads are not dangerous, road users are; having said that, that area is particularly non-forgiving and I think you should be thankful simply to be alive rather than yet another SH2 accident statistic. You were in the wrong regardless of what your excuses are, take your punishment like a big girl.

[scumdog]

Good luck Any Cop ticketing in a passing lane is pure scum in my opinion and even in the more sympathetic opinion of at least one on-list policeman should be focusing his attention on other issues.

Yup, there should be NO speed limit on a passing lane...:shifty:

What could possibly go wrong, I mean it's only a passing lane...not like it's a normal narrow road, is it?

[ducatilover]

Yup, there should be NO speed limit on a passing lane...:shifty:

What could possibly go wrong, I mean it's only a passing lane...not like it's a normal narrow road, is it?
Totally. In fact, if you get a speeding ticket, it should just be a reminder that you're a better driver than everyone else and you shouldn't have to pay them.

[cold comfort]

On trips like from Dn to ChCh how about an economical park and ride option on the train- then one could avoid the revenue collection/safety measure's, crap drivers (local and tourists), weather hazards, acts of God and even pointless discussion on this subject, with the added advantage of a mug of railway tea and a pie!

[Berries]

Have you ever been on the train between Chch and Dunedin? I did it once. Scenic, for like 15 minutes when you can see the coast, but by fuck it is slow. Seriously, if it is quicker to ride or drive than take the train then it is pretty much pointless. Double line it and bang a bullet train on there, Chch in an hour, and maybe. The only good thing about NZ trains is that if you ask nicely they will stop so you can get off and have that pie and a fag, and there is always a good chance you will kill a car driver at a level crossing. They certainly don't need to worry about speed enforcement.

Anyway, back on topic, I see lesley has left and gone back to the Skyline drifting forum after getting no help or sympathy here.

Bloody cagers.......

[_Shrek_]

Lesley here is a condensed version of what will happen in court.
JUdge Lesley did you exceed 100 km hr
Lesley Yes Sir
Fined .............

aye thats how it went with me so not only did the aleged speed stand I got hit with 130 court costs :brick:

[Jack Miller]

Now I am the last person who should be talking about speeds/speeding but if the above facts are correct, they being that it was dark, you were tired, and it was an unfamiliar road, was overtaking the truck at that time REALLY WORTH YOUR FUCKING LIFE...

Do you know something we don't St Gabriel, is Leslie now up there with you? As far as I was aware she DIDN'T DIE!

You make a good point though. I'm not fundamentalist about ticketing in passing lanes. While I'm certain that ticketing for "exceeding the speed limit" is wrong in passing lanes, I believe that tickets against careless, dangerous, etc remain valid and this case might have been one of those. Although I'm not sure darkness is an additional risk factor. The lume of any oncoming vehicle's headlights is visible long before the vehicle is. I'd have thought that would make overtaking at night safer (unless the oncoming vehicle is driving without lights - something I have never witnessed.)

Fr Jack

[St_Gabriel]

(unless the oncoming vehicle is driving without lights - something I have never witnessed.)

My turn to nit pick,

Maybe you haven't witnessed it because it was dark and they didn't have their lights on... :laugh:

[Jack Miller]

Maybe you haven't witnessed it because it was dark and they didn't have their lights on... :laugh:

I always have lights on, which would eventually show an oncoming vehicle at night, even if it's lights weren't on. I reckon the reason I've never seen it is because while many people don't care about other road users so don't consider their lights a warning device for others, the still need to see where they are going so don't drive at night without them.

[FJRider]

I always have lights on, which would eventually show an oncoming vehicle at night, even if it's lights weren't on. I reckon the reason I've never seen it is because while many people don't care about other road users so don't consider their lights a warning device for others, the still need to see where they are going so don't drive at night without them.

Even in daylight ... It supprises me how often darker coloured cars are more difficult to see ... either due to light conditions, or heat thermals off the road on warmer days ..

[Jack Miller]

Even in daylight ... It supprises me how often darker coloured cars are more difficult to see ... either due to light conditions, or heat thermals off the road on warmer days ..

They say it makes you blind.

[FJRider]

They say it makes you blind.

Do you just wear glasses ... :bleh:

[Pseudonym]

Even in daylight ... It supprises me how often darker coloured cars are more difficult to see ... either due to light conditions, or heat thermals off the road on warmer days ..

Gun metal gray Nissans on wet mornings?

[FJRider]

Gun metal gray Nissans on wet mornings?

Never seen one ... :innocent:

[rastuscat]

They say it makes you blind.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Morning Jacko.

[trustme]

As a fairly regular driver of large trucks, I have to say some of the worst experiences I have had have involved passing lanes. If Lesley's passing lane was the one up past the golf course , you are lucky you survived.

When you are following another truck & approaching the end of that passing lanes so you put on the indicator to move right. There are a line of cars beside the 2 trucks , some trying to get in front of the lead truck, 3 or 4 diving for the gap between the trucks , some hard on the brakes trying to get in behind & a whole bunch hung out in no mans land with cars approaching from ahead. Gets interesting I tells ya

That little shit fight was caused by an idiot in a camper van who got in front of us at the Thames turn off & proceeded to drive at 70/80 while camped on the centre line leaving no one an opportunity to pass. Nett result, huge frustration & people doing real dumb shit.

[Indoo]

Yeah found that towing a 8+ metre boat that people just lose all perspective when they see you at passing lanes and take some ridiculous risks, you see them coming up behind you and think, nah they must know they can't make it.

Giving free reign speed wise would just make it worse, just a blind eye to safe if slightly fast passing is all thats needed.

[Berries]

I think Lesley wrapped herself around a lamp post some time ago. Possibly at the end of a passing lane.

[ducatilover]

I think Lesley wrapped herself around a lamp post some time ago. Possibly at the end of a passing lane.
Was the truck driver's fault though.