Speed tolerance reduced for December and January

[chasio]

So, the 4km/h limit will apply for all of December and January according to this report (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11162903).

Sure, don't speed and don't get a ticket. Fine. But holy fecking moly.

I am no speed merchant, but 5km/h over is trivially easy to achieve unless one masters chameleon eyes: one eye on the speedo and the other on the road.

Have any studies ever been done to find out whether a paranoid observance of speed limits actually causes accidents through diverted attention?

[Devil]

I just saw that and it still fucks me off. If they want to crack down on certain periods, how about double demerits instead of moving the darn goalposts when it comes to the speed they'll ticket for? Who ever thought of this idea is a fucking moron (or a revenue gathering genius).

[SMOKEU]

Reducing the speed tolerance will have no meaningful effect on the road toll if drivers still continue to drive like muppets. The real reason why the road death toll has been decreasing over the past few years is because cars have been getting safer, not because driver behaviour is improved. It's the typical "ambulance at the bottom of the cliff" approach that the NZ government seems so obsessed with for many of their policies, instead of tackling the root cause of the issue, which in this case is the fact that people just can't fucking drive properly. It's time someone with power actually had balls to start making a real change, not some bullshit anti speeding policy with no real benefit. FTP.

[HenryDorsetCase]

blahdeblahdeblah.

Here's what you do:

1. become an anarchist antichrist wildchild number one double hard bastard

2. remove number plate.

3. ride like you are in Mad Max (the first, good one).

4. Don't complain like a little bitch when someone handcuffs you to a burning truck.

[Scuba_Steve]

People need learn this is not about saving lives in any way shape or form, this is about making large amounts of cash moneys at the expense of peoples safety & after this "trial" expect to see it become the standard

[HenryDorsetCase]

One of my contacts is an economist. With a good masters degree from a prestigious overseas university. He said to me in conversation recently that as part of his review of ACC operations for the gubblemunt department that cannot be named but which is all seeing and all powerful, that "cars still cross subsidise motorbikes to the tune of 30% in spite of the recent ACC levy/registration increases since 2009". And yes that is after adjusting for the variables like cars taking out bikes because car drivers are fuckwits generally. So single vehicle accidents where the motorcyclist is "at fault".

I have asked him for the sauce of that information and he is checking whether he is able to provide it.

But the implication is clear: if you think motorcycle safety levy increases and thus registration costs have reached their peak, be prepared for another 30% rise, in the name of "fairness".

I have given up trying to debate ACC with the guy because we fundamentally disagree on first principles. My view is that Woodhouse Report should be the basis of the ACC scheme, and that it is entirely consistent with the "no fault" basis of that scheme that all road user costs fall to the one account. His view (which is the now-orthodox Gubblemunt view) is that it is perfectly acceptable for the road user account to be split by vehicle type and a full recoveryfrom each vehicle type. The "death from 1000 cuts" scenario in my view. Of course it penalises a small, and more dangerous road user segment. their answer is "So what?- you have to pay your fair share to play". The definition of that fair share is the issue.

Anyway, thought that was interesting.

[chasio]

People need learn this is not about saving lives in any way shape or form, this is about making large amounts of cash moneys at the expense of peoples safety & after this "trial" expect to see it become the standard

Aye, like Australia.

I didn't care too much on long weekends because, (a) I stay at home to avoid the numpties and (b) people might be able to concentrate on their speed a bit more for a few days, maybe. But once the novelty wears off this will just be kerching, kerching, kerching, kerching...

I would love to know if using a vehicle with paranoid attention on the speedo can contribute to accidents. My gut says yes, but I have nothing with which to back it up.

[_Shrek_]

dropping the tolerance to 4k's is not going to fix stupidity :no:

[Gremlin]

Hah, we knew that was happening. Roll out on special weekends... give it some time. OK, couple of special months :rolleyes:

... wait some time, OK, apply it all the time.

What's happened on the weekends? Some have been better with less deaths. Some of those were crappy weather, I was out and about and could see far less vehicles on the road. On the weekends where the result was worse? Oh, it's our fault.

[imdying]

Sure, don't speed and don't get a ticket.It's getting more don't stop and don't get a ticket every day.

[rastuscat]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.

[Tigadee]

If they are reducing the tolerance, they should increase the speed limits... How about 120kph for highways and motorways?

And shouldn't they spend more energy on making roads better, rather than targeting motorists?

[Devil]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.

Thats great, but why arbitrarily move the tolerance? Heck, I wouldn't care if they left it at 5km/h - the issue I have is that it is different at different times of the year. Assuming the conditions allow I like to make the most time efficient progress possible on the open road - now I have to think whether its different tolerance time or not whereas before I would just *know* the boundaries.

[HenryDorsetCase]

If they are reducing the tolerance, they should increase the speed limits... How about 120kph for highways and motorways?
Its that already innit?

[Rhys]

I wish the police would focus more on poor driving, people holding up traffic (not pulling over) not indicating etc
I don't believe traveling at 110 on a straight section of motorway is dangerous

[Swoop]

I have asked him for the sauce of that information...
HP?


But the implication is clear: if you think motorcycle safety levy increases and thus registration costs have reached their peak, be prepared for another 30% rise...
Cool.
0% + 30% = Still no rego.

[Zedder]

Aye, like Australia.

I didn't care too much on long weekends because, (a) I stay at home to avoid the numpties and (b) people might be able to concentrate on their speed a bit more for a few days, maybe. But once the novelty wears off this will just be kerching, kerching, kerching, kerching...

I would love to know if using a vehicle with paranoid attention on the speedo can contribute to accidents. My gut says yes, but I have nothing with which to back it up.

There's something about it here, in particular paragraph five:http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/07/australia-deaths-go-up-after-speed-limits-imposed/

The Northern Territory will be starting a trial of no speed limit on a 200km section of open road from February next year.

[superjackal]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.

It must be so nice in Black and White land....

[jellywrestler]

I am no speed merchant, but 5km/h over is trivially easy to achieve unless one masters chameleon eyes: one eye on the speedo and the other on the road.

and is your speedo that accurate, are the tyres the correct size for your vehicle, they removed the need to check the accuracy of the speedos from the WOF checks at the same time they started this 4km/h shit, so you've now got a government certified check without a check on the speedo!!!!

[HenryDorsetCase]

and is your speedo that accurate, are the tyres the correct size for your vehicle, they removed the need to check the accuracy of the speedos from the WOF checks at the same time they started this 4km/h shit, so you've now got a government certified check without a check on the speedo!!!!

the idea being that obeying the lor is an absolute requirement, and its on you, and you can't weasel out by saying "But the state-sanctioned body which should have checked it, did check it and it was all right, because look, I have a WOF that says the vehicle is compliant". What it in fact says is the vehicle was compliant at the nanosecond it was checked (which in my view is an argument for the abolition of the WOF entirely, and replacing it with the same onus as speed: it is up to you to ensure your vehicle is compliant, and woe betide if it is not particularly if you are involved in a crash"

Meh, whatever. That'll be the way it is when I rule you all anyway. Fair warning.

[Scuba_Steve]

I would love to know if using a vehicle with paranoid attention on the speedo can contribute to accidents. My gut says yes, but I have nothing with which to back it up.

Distraction is the biggest killer on our roads bar none, steering at a speedo has done more damage than "speeding" ever will


I wish the police would focus more on poor driving, people holding up traffic (not pulling over) not indicating etc
I don't believe traveling at 110 on a straight section of motorway is dangerous

yea but how ya supposed to make the cash moneys off that? They need to increase the $$$ value 1st but don't worry slow driving will be the next target once they find they can't lower the speed limits anymore

[Maha]

I think it is widely accepted that most road users do NOT stick to the 100kph open road speed limit. A small percentage will always travel under 100kph and the rest on or just over 100kph. Raising the tolerance to 105 is a good thing and does not make me want to drive/ride any faster than suits me. I have no problem with it at all. The policing of the 100kph speed limit however, should include stopping those who want to travel at 70-80kph, which is where I feel that some will take an unnecessary risk when passing these oblivious drivers.

[rastuscat]

And shouldn't they spend more energy on making roads better, rather than targeting motorists?

Yeah, that'll work. A whole pile of uniformed cops out filling potholes on the state highways.

[Str8 Jacket]

Thats great, but why arbitrarily move the tolerance? Heck, I wouldn't care if they left it at 5km/h - the issue I have is that it is different at different times of the year. Assuming the conditions allow I like to make the most time efficient progress possible on the open road - now I have to think whether its different tolerance time or not whereas before I would just *know* the boundaries.


I wish the police would focus more on poor driving, people holding up traffic (not pulling over) not indicating etc
I don't believe traveling at 110 on a straight section of motorway is dangerous

I agree with them ^^^ Especially Rhys!

[Ulsterkiwi]

It does have a sniff of BS around it. It would seem that speed by itself is rarely if ever the direct cause of an accident. What we do have firm evidence of is the correlation between the level of carnage resulting from road traffic incident (not an accident because that implies noone was at fault, spot the movie quote:Punk:) and the speed the vehicle or vehicles were moving at when the incident occurred.
What CAUSED the incident in the first place is usually either inattention or bad decision making or a combination of both.

Heres a classic example. We were riding home. On SH1 sitting behind a ute+trailer for several kms whose speed was fluctuating between 60-80kph. Get to a two lane section of road and we mirror, signal, headcheck, manoevre to pass this guy whose legal speed should be not more than 90kph when road conditions allow. At 115kph we begin to get past him. I was paying attention to the road when we resumed the left hand lane but I would say we were clipping 120kph at that point and just about keeping in front of this guy. Who is more in the wrong? What was his decision making like? What was ours like?

Another. Proceeding south on SH1. Approaching a built up area on 2 lane road. Lead rider is in front of me 95-100kph, passing vehicles travelling much slower. He is in the left wheel track of the right hand lane. I am 2 seconds behind in the right wheel track of the right hand lane. My bike is about .95m wide. Group of riders approaching from behind. Still at 95-100kph. The rider immediately behind me disappears from my mirror. I hear, then see him coming along side me on my right hand side between me and the crash barrier on his american made large cruiser style motorcycle with exhausts producing lots of dB and hard luggage further widening his machine. I made an evasive manoevre in response (I dont mind admitting I was scared) He was moving past about 10kph faster than me. This group is immediately in front of us for the next several kms so clearly his manoevre has gained much in terms of progress and time.
What possible difference would it have made should this muppet have been travelling at 104 not 110kph?

Shit decisions cause people to die or be injured. Speed merely determines the details.

[bluninja]

Yeah, that'll work. A whole pile of uniformed cops out filling potholes on the state highways.

Didn't realise pot was that caustic as to make holes in the road. :shutup:

[Scuba_Steve]

Of-course too this lower tolerance will coincide with increased presence of scammers on passing lanes & downhill sections

[pritch]

A small percentage will always travel under 1000kph

Actually, the percentage that travel under that is probably very large, like 100%, now that we haven't got an air force.

All of December and January because they are the summer months. Wait until the dipshits figure out that February is summer too. Guess I'd better buy some new batteries for the detector display?

[Mushu]

Yeah, that'll work. A whole pile of uniformed cops out filling potholes on the state highways.

Why not, its more useful than what you pricks are usually doing, giving out bullshit tickets for highly dangerous activities like not having rego (I had a WOF), not wearing a seatbelt, or doing 58 in a 50 at 3am on a Tuesday.

[SVboy]

I wish the police would focus more on poor driving, people holding up traffic (not pulling over) not indicating etc
I don't believe traveling at 110 on a straight section of motorway is dangerous

This is correct inho.

[Ulsterkiwi]

Why not, its more useful than what you pricks are usually doing, giving out bullshit tickets for highly dangerous activities like not having rego (I had a WOF), not wearing a seatbelt, or doing 58 in a 50 at 3am on a Tuesday.

you are lucky they didnt take you away in the meat wagon and lock you up, how can you live with yourself????

[Ender EnZed]

So, the 4km/h limit will apply for all of December and January according to this report (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11162903).


I'm much more bothered by the different coloured Police cars. They're probably going to be harder to identify at a distance.

[Zedder]

It does have a sniff of BS around it. It would seem that speed by itself is rarely if ever the direct cause of an accident. What we do have firm evidence of is the correlation between the level of carnage resulting from road traffic incident (not an accident because that implies noone was at fault, spot the movie quote:Punk:) and the speed the vehicle or vehicles were moving at when the incident occurred.
What CAUSED the incident in the first place is usually either inattention or bad decision making or a combination of both.

Heres a classic example. We were riding home. On SH1 sitting behind a ute+trailer for several kms whose speed was fluctuating between 60-80kph. Get to a two lane section of road and we mirror, signal, headcheck, manoevre to pass this guy whose legal speed should be not more than 90kph when road conditions allow. At 115kph we begin to get past him. I was paying attention to the road when we resumed the left hand lane but I would say we were clipping 120kph at that point and just about keeping in front of this guy. Who is more in the wrong? What was his decision making like? What was ours like?

Another. Proceeding south on SH1. Approaching a built up area on 2 lane road. Lead rider is in front of me 95-100kph, passing vehicles travelling much slower. He is in the left wheel track of the right hand lane. I am 2 seconds behind in the right wheel track of the right hand lane. My bike is about .95m wide. Group of riders approaching from behind. Still at 95-100kph. The rider immediately behind me disappears from my mirror. I hear, then see him coming along side me on my right hand side between me and the crash barrier on his american made large cruiser style motorcycle with exhausts producing lots of dB and hard luggage further widening his machine. I made an evasive manoevre in response (I dont mind admitting I was scared) He was moving past about 10kph faster than me. This group is immediately in front of us for the next several kms so clearly his manoevre has gained much in terms of progress and time.
What possible difference would it have made should this muppet have been travelling at 104 not 110kph?

Shit decisions cause people to die or be injured. Speed merely determines the details.

In fact, Professor Mike Regan of the University of New South Wales and a 20 year veteran of studies into Transportation Human Factors, believes inattention is the biggest contributing factor in crashes but speed is often wrongly coded as the causal factor.

[Gremlin]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.
I'll fairly admit my general policy is speed limit +10kph. Take into account speedo inaccuracy, how worn my tyres are and which tyres they are etc, and it's good for 5kph over-read, so real speed, I'm not much over the limit. I can pretty much do that up hill down dale all day as I've got used to it. Last long weekend with the tolerance change, I'm reminding everyone about the change. I go out on the 2nd day, first few kilometres down the road... completely forgot the change, just settled into my usual rhythm. Fortunately there were no cops, and I did my best to adjust. It's annoying though as everything is a little bit different, the gear and speed aren't quite the same etc.

My ute, with cruise control, a bit easier, set and forget, but curiously, it's the first vehicle I've come across to actually under-read for some odd reason, roundabout 3kph.

Boss has been in Europe for 6 months... says the NZ cops are some of the strictest he's experienced.

Oh... and I wish the cops would enforce reduced speed limits, even a van would do. NW motorway is full of it at the moment, and even at limit +10, I hold my life in my fucken hands as the morons blast past...

[R650R]

This will be an Epic fail just like the time when they did the hidden camera thing. Back then the crash/offending rates went up as people after awhile just said oh hell just do it anyway and went back to speeding.
I agree we need some level of enforcement to protect us from ourselves but really this is a public relations fail and ineffective use of police time. There's ample rubbish driving out there that people should be pulled up on even though they aint speeding at time. And really the cops aren't going to enforce this 100% of the time as they will get bored and depressed by it too, hardly a 'better work story' pulling someone for 105...
But this is just the thin end of the wedge to get us used to what is next; which will be mandatory GPS tracking bought in with the assistance of phone companies and insurers. Just like how the USAF is replacing F16 pilots and planes with drones, highway cops will be redundant and some AI computer system will auto fine you for every offence and deduct it straight from your bank account.

[swbarnett]

"cars still cross subsidise motorbikes
My answer to this is simple "SO FUCKING WHAT?"


Name any two groups and I can guarentee that one subsidises the other. Let's, for example, split people up into those that regularly have accidents and those that hardly ever do. Obvious cross-subsidising there. Should someone that has never made an ACC claim in their life be awarded their entire life's levies back on their death bed? Of course not.

[swbarnett]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.
One won't have a motor accident if one doesn't leave the house either.


When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson.

[Scuba_Steve]

highway cops will be redundant and some AI computer system will auto fine you for every offence and deduct it straight from your bank account.

It's only a matter of time...

http://youtu.be/LE3oczJ1zgM?t=11s

[Zedder]

My answer to this is simple "SO FUCKING WHAT?"


Name any two groups and I can guarentee that one subsidises the other. Let's, for example, split people up into those that regularly have accidents and those that hardly ever do. Obvious cross-subsidising there. Should someone that has never made an ACC claim in their life be awarded their entire life's levies back on their death bed? Of course not.

Yep, it doesn't just apply to ACC though. There's probably a large amount of people who have never had to use a hospital's medical/surgical system fully and they certainly don't get a payout.

[awa355]

15 vehicles in file, the front one is doing 100kph, I 'll bet the last one is doing barely 80kph. And no one's going to get pissed off??:bs:

Ants might keep a single file without the concertina effect but humans can't.

[swbarnett]

Yep, it doesn't just apply to ACC though. There's probably a large amount of people who have never had to use a hospital's medical/surgical system fully and they certainly don't get a payout.
Exactly.

What we need is a nation-wide appreciation of the meaning of "public good" spending.

[chasio]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.

Like I said, I'm not a speed merchant and I do cross reference my speedo versus my bar-mounted GPS every now and then, when I find a suitable piece of quiet road. So I have a fair idea of how fast I am going, but I have no cruise control and no warning of exceeding a given limit. Yet if you saw me riding while you were working, I doubt very much you'd bother stopping me for a chat, even.

And of course getting a ticket is optional, I said as much, but that is deliberately missing the point. Unless I aim to do 90 in 100 zones (and thereby get (a) frustrated and (b) rogered up the behind every third day), I will need to be be uber-vigilant on every downhill. And if I am looking at my speedo four times as often, I am paying that much less attention to the real dangers around me.

Surely the whole point of the 10kmh tolerance (which I'd be happy to see at 10% e.g. 55 in a 50) is that it allows us to spend our attention dollars more fruitfully than ogling the speedo?

[willytheekid]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.

Actually its not always optional!...With the NZ mechanical standards LAWS relating to speedo accuracy and manufacturers allowable tollerances (10% either way!), it's still easy to get a ticket for no personal fault of the driver...but you guys knew that already aye, So you set it up so it cost's the driver Aprox $300 for a speedo accuracy check (Which can ONLY be done at approved testing facilities...which there are bugger all of), so the system goes against current mechanical law's, offers no affordable options to the majority of the public in regards to disbutes, and basically ensures maximum - un-questioned revenue collecting for extremely minor infractions of the out of date speed limits within NZ.

...But please, keep hiding behind the system, ya little work sayings and your manipulated figures-(The ones you now refuse to release to the media and public because they PROVE the current "war on speed" has nothing at all to do with actual Roadsafety, it is purely focused on revenue and profit!).

So I certainly hope you guys are happy selling out to the Gov'ts demands for more $$!..because its at the cost of the publics respect, tolerance, understanding and co-operation...thats what its actually costing YOU!! (Works both ways...but fuck the public aye, there just a pain in the arse!..but a great source of $$revenue$$...aye!)

And The Transport Ministry's very own annual speed survey showed the average speed on the open road fell to 96.3kmh!!, the lowest since the survey began in 1995.

...nuff said!, your blatantly ripping your fellow Kiwis off and using road-safety as a guise to do so...for shame!


:oi-grr:




PS...if you don't wanna be disrespected by the public?...then don't disrespect the public and there understanding of clear-cut Bullshit!

[Zedder]

Exactly.

What we need is a nation-wide appreciation of the meaning of "public good" spending.

I got my appreciation of public good spending by going overseas. However, I still think ACC has a way to go yet.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Yeah, that'll work. A whole pile of uniformed cops out filling potholes on the state highways.

as if!. I would be in favour of this if they were in a line, singing spiritually uplifting songs, and swinging their implements in time. COOL HAND LUKE or O BROTHER WHERE ART THOU?, take your pick.

eW9Xo2HtlJI

[HenryDorsetCase]

Why not, its more useful than what you pricks are usually doing, giving out bullshit tickets for highly dangerous activities like not having rego (I had a WOF), not wearing a seatbelt, or doing 58 in a 50 at 3am on a Tuesday.

Why would you make it so easy for them? If you had registered your car (it costs fuck all $280 a year! half the price of a bike) and were wearing your seatbelt (what sort of fuckwit doesnt wear a seatbelt?) I bet you would have had a better than even chance of walking on the 58 in a 50. You would only have to be five times as charming as that Arnold on Green Acres, instead of ten.

Whatever dude, you get zero sympathy from me.

[HenryDorsetCase]

My answer to this is simple "SO FUCKING WHAT?"


Name any two groups and I can guarentee that one subsidises the other. Let's, for example, split people up into those that regularly have accidents and those that hardly ever do. Obvious cross-subsidising there. Should someone that has never made an ACC claim in their life be awarded their entire life's levies back on their death bed? Of course not.

did you read the rest of my post numbnuts? I agree with you. On a principled basis even.

[Gremlin]

15 vehicles in file, the front one is doing 100kph, I 'll bet the last one is doing barely 80kph. And no one's going to get pissed off??:bs:

Ants might keep a single file without the concertina effect but humans can't.
In general cars can't keep a consistent speed. Wasn't ever more apparent than a mate and I transporting our bikes and gear down to Chch via ute. Stuck it in cruise around 90-95kph, and it was amazing how often cars would disappear in front, then we'd catch up while we never altered our speed...

[mrchips]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqzJkl1vV7I

[R650R]

In general cars can't keep a consistent speed. Wasn't ever more apparent than a mate and I transporting our bikes and gear down to Chch via ute. Stuck it in cruise around 90-95kph, and it was amazing how often cars would disappear in front, then we'd catch up while we never altered our speed...

Welcome to the world of frustration experienced by NZ's 22000 truck drivers every day. The same drivers then wake up from their slumber when you come up behind them, wrongly decide that your speeding, and then in the finest pieces of human logic decide that stamping on the brake pedal is the best way to ward off this perceived threat...
I must admit though that the pedal springs are so soft on modern cars these days it can be an effort to keep an exact steady speed compared to HQ cruise control on 600HP truck.
It should be a crime to back off the gas approaching a hill on a clear road and also to apply the brakes after the apex of a corner, although many motorists are lacking that basic road reading skill.

[Mo NZ]

After the success from the latest long weekend reducing of the speed tolerance vs crashes etc review.......
For the next 2 months or so ( Dec and Jan) the tolerance will be lowered reduced to 4KPH.:Police:

[Ocean1]

Yeah, that'll work. A whole pile of uniformed cops out filling potholes on the state highways.

That'd be excellent if you wouldn't mind, just lay off the yellow paint, eh? Following aunt Daisy mile after mile of SH1 is doing my fucking head in.

I actually found a bit of road without much paint at all last week, a bit of gravel up Raglan way. Bloody magnificient.

[Ocean1]

It should be a crime to back off the gas approaching a hill on a clear road and also to apply the brakes after the apex of a corner

Amen.

An' shit.

[Gremlin]

Welcome to the world of frustration experienced by NZ's 22000 truck drivers every day.
True, and it would be even worse for them. When a B-Train is held up by cars on SH2 south of Auckland (something I've pretty much seen every time I've ventured near the highway) it's quite pathetic...

Pity adaptive cruise control is on expensive vehicles... After now having the luxury of cruise control, I've pretty much immediately wanted adaptive after that...

[Mushu]

Why would you make it so easy for them? If you had registered your car (it costs fuck all $280 a year! half the price of a bike) and were wearing your seatbelt (what sort of fuckwit doesnt wear a seatbelt?) I bet you would have had a better than even chance of walking on the 58 in a 50. You would only have to be five times as charming as that Arnold on Green Acres, instead of ten.

Whatever dude, you get zero sympathy from me.

I couldn't care less whether I have your sympathy but for the record both the lack of rego and lack of seatbelt were because of a bike crash a few days earlier, driving my car because the bike was out of action and no seatbelt due to the shattered collar bone. But my excuse has nothing to do with the reason behind the original post, I was pointing out that the offenses had absolutely nothing to do with public safety and were all about the cop bringing in another 5 or 6 hundred bucks

[Angel_of_Metal]

The Germans have proven quite well that it is not speed that kills people, it is decent roads and good driver training.
The comments that it is nothing but a revenue generator and another example of the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff are spot. on.

[Dave-]

Chch people, PM me and I'll fill you in on a awesome stretch my buddies and I know about where the cops can't ticket you. There's sometimes cops on it but it's mean cause you can just go by them and they can't ticket ya. t's fuckin meeeeeean.

[Angel_of_Metal]

Chch people, PM me and I'll fill you in on a awesome stretch my buddies and I know about where the cops can't ticket you. There's sometimes cops on it but it's mean cause you can just go by them and they can't ticket ya. t's fuckin meeeeeean.

And they can't ticket you because...?

[oneofsix]

Chch people, PM me and I'll fill you in on a awesome stretch my buddies and I know about where the cops can't ticket you. There's sometimes cops on it but it's mean cause you can just go by them and they can't ticket ya. t's fuckin meeeeeean.

sounds like a challenge to your local :Police:

Good luck with that.

I think someone is forgetting that a ticket is only an infringement notice, they can give you that when ever they like, making it stick is another story.

[Dave-]

And they can't ticket you because...?

It's illegal, it's all wrapped up in red tape, land ownership, etc etc

it's real odd the first time you pass a cop and they don't do anything about it.

What's weirder is that they'll all admit to it's existence and their lack of jurisdiction on it, I guess no one has ever bothered to ask them?


sounds like a challenge to your local :Police:

Good luck with that.

I think someone is forgetting that a ticket is only an infringement notice, they can give you that when ever they like, making it stick is another story.

Nope, no trickery either.

You're not from chch so I can't tell you, but I'm told there's a few of these spots in NZ.

[Angel_of_Metal]

It's illegal, it's all wrapped up in red tape, land ownership, etc etc

it's real odd the first time you pass a cop and they don't do anything about it.

What's weirder is that they'll all admit to it's existence and their lack of jurisdiction on it, I guess no one has ever bothered to ask them?

Huh. Looks like I'm coming down to Chch for a visit then!

[Dave-]

Huh. Looks like I'm coming down to Chch for a visit then!

There's 2 south of Auckland, though I haven't seen them or tested them myself.

[oneofsix]

It's illegal, it's all wrapped up in red tape, land ownership, etc etc

it's real odd the first time you pass a cop and they don't do anything about it.

What's weirder is that they'll all admit to it's existence and their lack of jurisdiction on it, I guess no one has ever bothered to ask them?



Nope, no trickery either.

You're not from chch so I can't tell you, but I'm told there's a few of these spots in NZ.

umm interesting. I got the information I wanted, thanks. Whilst this is what I suspected but I can't think of why the :Police: wouldn't have jurisdiction unless it is private land, including Maori land I guess.

[Zedder]

There's 2 south of Auckland, though I haven't seen them or tested them myself.

Ruapuna in Chch, Hampton Downs and Pukekohe in Akld.

[oneofsix]

Ruapuna in Chch, Hampton Downs and Pukekohe in Akld.

:rofl: of course :facepalm:

[Dave-]

Ruapuna in Chch, Hampton Downs and Pukekohe in Akld.

I knew you'd ruin the fun.

You or one of the other cunts.

[Zedder]

I knew you'd ruin the fun.

You or one of the other cunts.

Cunts? Is that you Reibz?

[cheshirecat]

Yeah, that'll work. A whole pile of uniformed cops out filling potholes on the state highways.

Your management people could do it instead of inventing more paperwork for you.

[RidingHard]

Boss has been in Europe for 6 months... says the NZ cops are some of the strictest he's experienced.

Yup. In most civilized countries cops won't bother ya unless you're driving dangerously e.g. changing lanes suddenly etc.

You'd think the only road issues in NZ are speeders and drunk-drivers. Pretty sure there are more common issues, like shitty drivers looking at their speedo all the time.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Yup. In most civilized countries cops won't bother ya unless you're driving dangerously e.g. changing lanes suddenly etc.

You'd think the only road issues in NZ are speeders and drunk-drivers. Pretty sure there are more common issues, like shitty drivers looking at their speedo all the time.

Or fucking arseholes texting. Instant death when i rule you all.

[rastuscat]

In fact, Professor Mike Regan of the University of New South Wales and a 20 year veteran of studies into Transportation Human Factors, believes inattention is the biggest contributing factor in crashes but speed is often wrongly coded as the causal factor.

Okay, so inattention is the greatest causal factor.

So, when those inattentive people crash, is it better for them to be going faster or slower?

The cause matters, but beyond that, the outcome is heavily influenced by the energy imparted at impact.

Just a fact. Sorry for being so dull.

[mossy1200]

If everyone drove at 95 for a month and no tickets were issued they would make the limit 80 again like it used to be.
The reward for a reduction in speed related tax is a higher tax rate or a lower allowance before being taxed.

[Akzle]

well. That was 5 pages of same ole same ole, and shit.
1-dont complain about 'the rules', citizen.
2-fuck the rules.
3-i petted my goat today. I like my goat.

[Akzle]

So, when those inattentive people crash, is it better for them to be going faster or slower?

The cause matters, but beyond that, the outcome is heavily influenced by the energy imparted at impact.


doesnt fuking matter, actually. 80% of fatalaties happen below the speed limit. (im statistically safer speeding)

your turn.

[Scuba_Steve]

I must say tho; with public confidence & respect in cops at an all time low, what better way to boost public perception than to further piss people off. :tugger:

[HenryDorsetCase]

3-i petted my goat today. I like my goat.

Goats are awesome. No funny buiness though, eh :nono:

[Hoon]

Good one I say. I have no sympathy for people that speed or break the law. The govt needs to get money from somewhere and I'd rather it come from the dumbarses out there instead from honest law abiding citizens. Sure I've had the occasional speeding ticket but I know the risks and am prepared to accept the punishment should I get caught.

[Zedder]

Okay, so inattention is the greatest causal factor.

So, when those inattentive people crash, is it better for them to be going faster or slower?

The cause matters, but beyond that, the outcome is heavily influenced by the energy imparted at impact.

Just a fact. Sorry for being so dull.

The Prof believes inattention is the biggest contributing factor rtc, not causal factor so there's other factors at play, environment etc.

Crashing off the road at 100 plus kms into the bulldust in outback Oz is way different from a Downtown Auckland traffic scenario obviously.

[Ocean1]

The cause matters, but beyond that, the outcome is heavily influenced by the energy imparted at impact.

The inescapable conclusion of which is a speed limit of zero.

When you can present a graph showing the causal relationship between speed and safety and you're prepared to negotiate a speed AND it's associated fatality rate with those actually using the roads then you'll be contributing to a rational choice. Failing to do so is a nonsense driven by a safety culture with little relevance to the real world.

There is no such thing as perfectly safe.

[rastuscat]

doesnt fuking matter, actually. 80% of fatalaties happen below the speed limit. (im statistically safer speeding)

your turn.

My turn........76% of stats are sucky.

I've oft quoted the laws of physics. Is it so hard to understand that if you fall over while walking its better than falling over while running?

Why you fell over is an entirely different issue. Sometimes its coz you're a bad runner.

I'm trying to get my head around your odd logic about it being safer to speed. Breathtakingly stupid, but challenging.

[Scuba_Steve]

My turn........76% of stats are sucky.

I've oft quoted the laws of physics. Is it so hard to understand that if you fall over while walking its better than falling over while running?

Why you fell over is an entirely different issue. Sometimes its coz you're a bad runner.

I'm trying to get my head around your odd logic about it being safer to speed. Breathtakingly stupid, but challenging.

Here lets put it in an experiment you can try out at the office... spend the day walking round while constantly looking at your watch (or "smartphone" if you don't have a watch), then spend the next day jogging round but watching where you're going.

Let me know which works out better for you.

[rastuscat]

The inescapable conclusion of which is a speed limit of zero.

When you can present a graph showing the causal relationship between speed and safety and you're prepared to negotiate a speed AND it's associated fatality rate with those actually using the roads then you'll be contributing to a rational choice. Failing to do so is a nonsense driven by a safety culture with little relevance to the real world.

There is no such thing as perfectly safe.

Yes. No speed is safe completely. But as a society we have to travel about. Its important for social, financial, actually so many reasons.

So, as a democratic society we elect people to make decisions on the balance between the need to travel pitted against the safety of the whole. At this time in history we have the limits set by various democratically elected government stratas.

Those strata employ and direct various activites around enforcing such limits as are set.

And this is where the discussion started.

[Dave-]

The inescapable conclusion of which is a speed limit of zero.

When you can present a graph showing the causal relationship between speed and safety and you're prepared to negotiate a speed AND it's associated fatality rate with those actually using the roads then you'll be contributing to a rational choice. Failing to do so is a nonsense driven by a safety culture with little relevance to the real world.

There is no such thing as perfectly safe.

The probability of death tends to one as the independent variable tends to zero though. Which makes sense, if you don't move, or don't move fast enough, then you die.

[Akzle]

Is it so hard to understand that if you fall over while walking its better than falling over while running?

I'm trying to get my head around your odd logic about it being safer to speed. Breathtakingly stupid, but challenging.

come now rasty, you cant tell me you actually believe that shit?! I thought you were all like 'i am cop, i enforce policy, FUCK YOU plebian'

but you actually BELIEVE slow =safe?

IHC must be the safest place out.

It depends, if im running im probably paying attention, whereas if im walking, im probably drunk. So id take my chances, either way, my choice, innit?
Or are you going to ticket me for running with scissors in the daycare centre?

You must have been stoked to go from hall monitor sash to blue hat.

[Ocean1]

Yes. No speed is safe completely. But as a society we have to travel about. Its important for social, financial, actually so many reasons.

So, as a democratic society we elect people to make decisions on the balance between the need to travel pitted against the safety of the whole. At this time in history we have the limits set by various democratically elected government stratas.

Those strata employ and direct various activites around enforcing such limits as are set.

And this is where the discussion started.


The decisions are obviously not in line with the electors wishes, as evidenced by the majority of drivers cheerfully exceeding the limit on a daily basis.

Which is where the discussion needs to begin. Most, whether they're aware of the statistical likelihood of injury or not are accepting the risk associated with higher limits. Why isn't that publicly acceptable balance acceptable to the elected decision makers?

I don't really think the reason's rooted in cost savings for ACC. I think it's just an irrational response to an impossible demand to "do something about the carnage".

[Dave-]

if im running im probably paying attention, whereas if im walking, im probably drunk.

It's the time when you're probably not paying attention which these laws are set for. Seeing as it's impractical for us to test you're attention (it's easy to do in theory - you're an idiot) it makes much more sense to have a blanket rule for everyone, 100% of the time.

[Akzle]

It's the time when you're probably not paying attention which these laws are set for. Seeing as it's impractical for us to test you're attention (it's easy to do in theory - you're an idiot) it makes much more sense to have a blanket rule for everyone, 100% of the time.
yeah nah. If im piloting metal, im paying attention.
Blanket rule? No cars.
Very easy to police. And every road suddenly becomes 4 motorbike lanes in each direction.

Next.

[rastuscat]

) it makes much more sense to have a blanket rule for everyone, 100% of the time.

Yeah, thing is, laws have to be enforcable to be effective.

I'd love to have a law that allows better drivers to go faster than fuckwits, but that'd mean setting up a system to define who the fuckwits are.

So we make a law for everyone based on the fuckwits. Because they do exist, so we gotta allow for them.

[Dave-]

yeah nah. If im piloting metal, im paying attention.
Blanket rule? No cars.
Very easy to police. And every road suddenly becomes 4 motorbike lanes in each direction.

Next.

No you said you're probably paying attention while speeding, which implies there is a finite amount of time you aren't.

Now you're saying it's 100% of the time? so you were mistaken?

I would have thought someone who can operate at 100% all the time wouldn't make a mistake like that....

[rastuscat]

yeah nah. If im piloting metal, im paying attention.
Blanket rule? No cars.
Very easy to police. And every road suddenly becomes 4 motorbike lanes in each direction.

Next.

Cool idea that one. Totally not going to happen, but cool.

Trouble is, I'm working in the real world where shit has to actually happen, not virtually.

Develop the idea into a business case Akzle, I'll push it for ya.

BTW, we've hsd a win on DRLs for motorcycles. From 1 Jan 14 theyll be legal. The submissions worked.

[Indoo]

It's a shame we don't have the same fanatical level of debate, analysis and resourcing applied to reducing our nations suicide figures which are more than twice that of the road toll.

[DMNTD]

Good one I say. I have no sympathy for people that speed or break the law. The govt needs to get money from somewhere and I'd rather it come from the dumbarses out there instead from honest law abiding citizens. Sure I've had the occasional speeding ticket but I know the risks and am prepared to accept the punishment should I get caught.

And you chose Hoon as a log in why?

[Scuba_Steve]

It's a shame we don't have the same fanatical level of debate, analysis and resourcing applied to reducing our nations suicide figures which are more than twice that of the road toll.

Govt still hasn't found a way to profit off that, I mean they have that 20,000$ fine for getting hit by trains but think they might be finding it hard to claim said money

[R650R]

Yeah, thing is, laws have to be enforcable to be effective.

I'd love to have a law that allows better drivers to go faster than fuckwits, but that'd mean setting up a system to define who the fuckwits are.

So we make a law for everyone based on the fuckwits. Because they do exist, so we gotta allow for them.

You have a system in place already, well for trucks anyway, called the operator safety rating system. It could easily be adapted to cars and bikes but the govt isn't really serious about saving lives, only appearing to save lives and get re elected next time around. For those that don't know, trucking firms are rated under a LTSA scheme by how many accidents, overloads, defects and infringments the drivers get. The bad ones get targeted more while the others get waved through. I'm sure it made my employers day when being the last driver with a clean license that I got pinged for 82 in a 70 at 4am...
I do pity Rastus and his colleagues being tasked with trying to make a difference with such a messy system with all its contradictions, but its an insult to human intelligence to have this arbitrary 4k tolerance.

[AllanB]

I'd suggest that most of the tickets will be issues in sub 70km areas - it's OK to be doing 60 in a 50 ......

[Akzle]

Yeah, thing is, laws have to be enforcable to be effective.

I'd love to have a law that allows better drivers to go faster than fuckwits, but that'd mean setting up a system to define who the fuckwits are.

So we make a law for everyone based on the fuckwits. Because they do exist, so we gotta allow for them.

but, dealing in fact, its not enforceable 100% of the time,
that persons continually get noticed for speeding, shows its not effective, either.

That 'good driver' scheme could be made out of the licensing bullshit, innit? But it isnt, is it.
I wonder why.

[Akzle]

No you said you're probably paying attention while speeding, which implies there is a finite amount of time you aren't.

Now you're saying it's 100% of the time? so you were mistaken?

I would have thought someone who can operate at 100% all the time wouldn't make a mistake like that....

youre being deliberately jew, methinks.

I was talking about running, yknow,fluro sneakers, ipod arm band and tight pants...

'speeding'? I do it frequently. Total number of traffic collisions due to speed, or even over the limit = 0
thems good odds.

Dolphins are intelligent and friendly.

[eelracing]

It's quite simple,if you use backroads you'll never get pulled.
Popo can't get enough revenue so they don't frequent there.
If you insist on the drudgery of town limits and highways then your a tool,or car driver...same diff.

[jellywrestler]

Trouble is, I'm working in the real world where shit has to actually happen, not virtually.

hsit doesn't actually happen, it's caused by arseholes.....

[jellywrestler]

Dolphins are intelligent and friendly. dolphins are just gay sharks...

[kiwi cowboy]

My answer to this is simple "SO FUCKING WHAT?"


Name any two groups and I can guarentee that one subsidises the other. Let's, for example, split people up into those that regularly have accidents and those that hardly ever do. Obvious cross-subsidising there. Should someone that has never made an ACC claim in their life be awarded their entire life's levies back on their death bed? Of course not.

Not to mention the fact that I would say 99.9 percent of motor cycle owners own and redg a car/4wd and pay the acc portion of that added to motorcycle acc = bullshit.

[rastuscat]

Cool, another thread hijacked by the ACC debate.

[Oblivion]

I hate staring at the speedo. I despise it. If I'm not looking out for myself on the road, who the fuck will. There have been numerous times where I've taken a quick squizz at the speedo, doing around 59, and boom, theres a car right in front of me that didnt indicate or even look. A quick blast of the horn usually gets their attention though.

[russd7]

Cool, another thread hijacked by the ACC debate.
not hijacked, we all know its acc fault that we have to speed to get the value out of our acc levies paid to liscence our motorcycles and then because of the extra damage caused by the sudden stop caused by the elevated speed that we are travelling meaning that acc cannot afford to cover it then you guys have to get revenue from our said speeding to make up the short fall, see its the fault of acc that we speed and then you have to ticket us for speeding ,:mad:
phew that was a mouth full but i think i got it all out

[Scuba_Steve]

I don't think it's been posted yet? Here's the new P.I.G.mobiles in mention

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/q71/s720x720/1458576_10151734469506302_1862804844_n.jpg

[kiwi cowboy]

Cool, another thread hijacked by the ACC debate.

Sowwy wusty:bye::2guns:.
What gets me with the speed kills bit is-when traveling through the lindas on sunday I had 3 people in cars come around corners on my side of the road (half to threequarters of the car across the centre line) To which I had to avoid and all these corners were 75km's corners.
Now these people were probably not going over 100km's so no technically speeding but couldn't drive for shit.
100-105-110km's speed is not the issue but driving to the conditions is but not enforced.

[rastuscat]

Sowwy wusty:bye::2guns:.
What gets me with the speed kills bit is-when traveling through the lindas on sunday I had 3 people in cars come around corners on my side of the road (half to threequarters of the car across the centre line) To which I had to avoid and all these corners were 75km's corners.
Now these people were probably not going over 100km's so no technically speeding but couldn't drive for shit.
100-105-110km's speed is not the issue but driving to the conditions is but not enforced.

Yeah, then we go and enforce the failing to keep left thing and suddenly it becomes revenue collecting.

Fuckit, back to the drawing board :wait:

[kiwi cowboy]

Yeah, then we go and enforce the failing to keep left thing and suddenly it becomes revenue collecting.

Fuckit, back to the drawing board :wait:

fuck mate come hide in the pigroot some weekend :laugh:iv'e seen some shit driving through there that could get your performance target:bleh:.
would rather see tickets written for the left rule than 105 on a straight road with no one else in sight:clap:.

Just a side note how do you explain the article on the news just now the road toll in 1970 something was over a 1000 and last year was 421 I think they said but there saying speed kills.
A- in 1970 something there were far less cars on the road.
B- the speed limit then was 80km's an hour.

So there are a shit load more cars on the road and 20km's/h faster limit and the toll is down by 2/3rds but speed kills.

[Berries]

I'd love to have a law that allows better drivers to go faster than fuckwits, but that'd mean setting up a system to define who the fuckwits are.
Is the word you are looking for discretion?


It's a shame we don't have the same fanatical level of debate, analysis and resourcing applied to reducing our nations suicide figures which are more than twice that of the road toll.
I rode my bike today and I did not purposefully kill myself. Same yesterday. I have ridden my bike quite a lot over the years and so far have managed not to commit suicide. I don't really care about the suicide stats because they don't affect me. I don't really care about the speed tolerance either because I rarely ride in that boring band between 104 and 109km/h.

[Tigadee]

Its that already innit?

Only for a very few strethes of motorway, right?

I was really surprised by SH2 where it's mostly 90kph on easy-going motorways. What gives with that? :scratch:


Yeah, that'll work. A whole pile of uniformed cops out filling potholes on the state highways.

Oh c'mon! You know I don't mean the police doing that... :facepalm: I mean the Government, yo! (i.e. NZTA)

I think the cops have better things to do than filling potholes and busting obese German millionaires...


It's a shame we don't have the same fanatical level of debate, analysis and resourcing applied to reducing our nations suicide figures which are more than twice that of the road toll.

Tell the Government they should hand out tickets to those who survived suicide attempts. Maybe then they'll do something about that issue...

[kiwi cowboy]

There would be a number of reasons like the cars back then not being as capable at handling high speeds/impacts (no airbags), Seat belts may not have been compulsary, Drink driving may not have had as big a penalty as today.
If statistics were kept on the sort of accidents that killed back then and whether or not the same accidents killed today as regular, the differences could be accurately determined possibly

Yes quite agree with you BUT the way the police/ media portray it it is only the reduction in SPEED tollerance that is responsible

[Pixie]

I seriously hope it is a total fucking failure and the roads run with rivers of blood and gore (the substance,not the town or the eco-wanker) and of course the piggies will come up with some weak excuse..... "they didn't pay attention to us" or "cars went through a time_warp and suddenly became less safe".



<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/2BKdbxX1pDw" allowfullscreen="" width="420" frameborder="0" height="315"></iframe>
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BKdbxX1pDw)

[Zedder]

Yes quite agree with you BUT the way the police/ media portray it it is only the reduction in SPEED tollerance that is responsible

You can imagine then, how the people of Oz's Northern Territory, and other states, felt when the Minister for Transport refused to release the results of four taxpayer funded studies on the situation before finally going with the no speed limit trial.

In other news, I read today about Auckland Airport taxi drivers who will block airport and city streets unless their demands for higher minimum fares are met. Those guys appear to know about getting protesting right.

[Pixie]

In other news, I read today about Auckland Airport taxi drivers who will block airport and city streets unless their demands for higher minimum fares are met. Those guys appear to know about getting protesting right.

Lot of taxi drivers are immigrants.They have spines,unlike laidback kiwis who will let anyone fuck them in the arse till their eyes bulge.

[Pixie]

My turn........76% of stats are sucky.

I've oft quoted the laws of physics. Is it so hard to understand that if you fall over while walking its better than falling over while running?

Why you fell over is an entirely different issue. Sometimes its coz you're a bad runner.

I'm trying to get my head around your odd logic about it being safer to speed. Breathtakingly stupid, but challenging.

Do they force you pigs to drink the coolaid? Or do you all line up ,eagerly awaiting a cup?

[Pixie]

come now rasty, you cant tell me you actually believe that shit?! I thought you were all like 'i am cop, i enforce policy, FUCK YOU plebian'

but you actually BELIEVE slow =safe?

IHC must be the safest place out.



No.Police HQ is

[Zedder]

Lot of taxi drivers are immigrants.They have spines,unlike laidback kiwis who will let anyone fuck them in the arse till their eyes bulge.

That's quite a generalisation there about kiwis not all are like that, the Bikoi showed that and also you protest by not paying rego/licencing as do others. However, mass protesting has certainly fizzled out.

I've heard some types of immigrants like doing the arse thing as well....

[Jay GTI]

Slightly less I’ve had a bad day at work post this time...

Right, so once again we’re about to get taxed heavily in the name of “road safety”. Sure, if you have 2 brain cells and one is on warm standby, it’s as simple as “don’t speed and you won’t get caught”. But if you can actually manage breathing and thinking at the same time, you’ll probably be like me and think this is all just a scam. I have yet to find any clear, cold, hard evidence that it isn’t.

Let’s start with a wider view of political fund raising. Govts long ago realised that if they make something socially unacceptable, they can easily pass legislation to suit themselves. Global warming an issue? Well we’re all going to die if we don’t do anything about it, so here’s your carbon tax. Smoking? Definitely a killer, so let’s push up the tax on tobacco sales, way past the point where the revenue raised can easily pay for all the healthcare related costs for sick smokers. Alcohol, right... causes all sorts of issues, so a bit more tax on that too. You’ll also be hearing about the brainwave method for tackling the obesity epidemic. That’s right, tax on fatty foods. Genius. So it doesn’t take much of a leap to realise that if speeding is demonised, then it can also easily be turned into a nice little revenue stream.

Demonising speed is easy, you have lots of cooked stats that show these horrible outcomes from people having accidents at speed. You can dig deeper into those stats and start coming to the obvious conclusion that speed wasn’t a causal factor in the majority of these accidents, but that is easily rebuffed with a bit of simple physics. The people in these accidents would have had a better outcome if they were travelling more slowly. Which is true. But, that is taking one single element out of the wider picture of road safety and using it for propaganda purposes. We all have a social and financial need to get to places, reasonably quickly, and in reasonable safety. In order to ensure we can make our necessary journeys, in or on our own vehicles, in relative safety, we have road rules. These road rules are primarily designed to allow us to travel in a safe and efficient manner, without significant impact on other road users. But, they don’t remove the fundamental problem with travelling by vehicle on public roads, which is it’s dangerous. Whether you are doing 100kph, or 50kph, there are scenarios that, due to the speed at which you were travelling, will cause serious injury and death to you and the other vehicle occupants involved. We can attempt to tackle this by lessening one of the factors, your vehicle speed, but where do you actually stop? If we drop speed limits, we increase journey times, we increase congestion, we impact the economy, so it needs to be a balance. Someone, somewhere, with some reasonable thought (hopefully), put all the factors together and came up with the speed limits. These are, by their very design, a guideline of the speeds that we can travel in relative safety, with a high probability of reaching our destination without incident. No they aren’t a target, nor are they absolute, because those simple laws of physics the propagandists like trolling out also work against us.

Driving at a constant speed. Tried this recently? By constant, I don’t mean within a set tolerance, I mean sticking exactly to one speed, say 50kph, for an entire journey. It’s not possible. For a start, there’s corners, intersections, hills, other traffic, the weather, where the sun is in the sky and lots of other external factors that directly influence our speed. There is also the fact that the accelerator pedal is not a digital device, there is no 50kph setting, no 80kph setting, no 100kph setting. No, in order to even roughly maintain a constant speed, you have to constantly adjust the pressure you put on the accelerator pedal (and the brake), reacting at the same time to the road conditions, gradient, corner sharpness, other traffic and everything else we must account for when trying to drive within the speed limit. In truth, those simple laws of physics are actually working against us. And the law makers know this. They also use the laws of physics against us. They know that small incremental speeding is natural, normal, in most instances pretty darn safe, yet it is also very easy to both measure and penalise. All is needed is to convince enough people that speeding is evil and woah there buddy, we even might want this tax, sorry I mean road safety campaign.

Unless your car is really smart and has a speed limiter, you are going to exceed the speed limit by some small increment in every journey you make. You will also travel under the posted speed limit for parts of that journey. And you will do this every journey, for your life. That is a lot of journeys where you’ve exceeded the speed limit and nothing what-so-ever happened to you, or the other occupants of the vehicle, or other vehicles, or pedestrians or anyone else. You simply got in your car or on your bike, travelled to your destination and arrived safely. This is happening the world over, daily, with millions of people safely reaching their destination, while at some point, speeding. So, oddly enough, people have formed the opinion that 56kph in a 50kph zone, if all other factors are considered and accounted for in a safe enough manner, isn’t particularly fraught with danger. And they know this, because they do it every day, for years and years. Statistically, you are going to get to your destination in perfect safety, even if you just roughly match the speed limits. Statistically, you will exceed a 4kph threshold at some point and the worst that will happen is you may be ticketed.

However, the propagandists love to tell you about the reduction in serious accidents and road deaths as a direct result of the war on speeding. They point, gleefully, at the speeding campaigns and trumpet the zero tolerance weekends that showed less accidents and deaths than previous years, whilst conveniently forgetting about those zero tolerance weekends where there wasn’t the same result and in some cases, there were more road deaths and serious accidents. This is because, as anyone who has spent time on public roads will tell you, there are many, many factors that result in road accidents. Speed, in some cases, isn’t even relevant. Then there are the other shifting goal posts. Take a 1973 Toyota Corolla (you can find plenty on TM) and park it next to a 2013 Toyota Corolla. The 2013 car may as well have been built on another planet, by comparison. We now have, as standard, ABS, ESP, crumple zones, side impact bars, a cabin full of air bags, retractable seatbelts, anti-submarining seats, collapsing steering columns... all of which have had a huge impact on the driver and passenger safety in the event of an accident. Shit, now we even have cars that will do an emergency stop for you. That was pure science fantasy for the people who bought a ‘73 Corolla new. So if you want to trumpet the success of anti-speeding campaigns over the years, how about including the full picture including the evolution of road design and construction and vehicles in that statement?

Ok then, the numbers of road deaths and accidents aren’t really a good indicator of the success of anti-speeding campaigns, so what would be a good indicator? Well, there’s a really obvious one. Tickets. If the zero tolerance campaigns were doing their job, the message would be getting through and we’d be successfully adjusting the way we drive to suit. Which should, logically, mean that we should be seeing a reduction in the number of speeding tickets being issued. Well, that we most definitely aren’t. Sure, the campaign has gathered momentum, there is more focus on speeding and there are more ways to get caught, so in theory the reduction of tickets through successful campaigning will be offset by more speed cameras, vans and patrol cars. But really, the increase is incredible! Quite often we see in the press, the Police triumphantly boasting about the huge numbers of tickets issued for a particular location, or a particular weekend. “Woo-hoo” they cry, and bleat on about the positive impact they are making, the number of people that will reconsider their driving habits and slow down, as a result of their fines and demerits. Well, I seriously doubt that to be true, if speeding tickets are increasing at the rate they are, that is more an indication that the programme is failing, massively. We are not slowing down.

So, if the message isn’t getting through, what message is? Oh that’s right, resentment. Please people, hate cops. I remember when the first speed camera was installed in NZ, it was in Birkenhead near where I lived at the time. Shortly after it’s installation, somebody reversed over it, intentionally. One speed camera in New Zealand and within weeks of it operating, it was vandalised. It was a long time ago, but when the person who reversed over it went to court, I seem to remember him saying he did it because it was revenue collecting and not about road safety. Don’t hold me on that one, though. So, you can look at all the “good” work the anti-speed campaigns are doing, the lives the Govt and Police have “saved” as a result, the people who don’t have to go through the emotional distress as a result of a serious accident or road death and all the propaganda bullshit, but the real impact of these anti-speeding campaigns is more and more people are feeling serious resentment towards the Police and the Govt. How many times has this gone round and round on KB? How many times has Rastus had to copy and paste his well-rehearsed rebuttals to the next KB’r who decides that, yeah actually, it’s all bullshit? If I could fund a study on such things, I would love to see what the impact of these campaigns has had on the way the general public now perceive the effectiveness and purpose of the traffic branch of the Police and in fact, the Police in general. And how much respect they now have, as a result of more and more people seeing the war on speed as revenue collecting. I’ve been reading Rastus’s replies for a while now and even he seems to be losing the will... and it seems this is simply because the “right” message isn’t getting through, but the resentment is. I kind of feel sorry for the traffic branch guys, they are having their jobs made more and more difficult by these campaigns.

Road safety isn’t as simple as if you don’t speed you won’t get caught, or the higher the speed the bigger the mess, it’s way, way more complicated than that. No, I’m not going to pretend I have the answers, but I do think the answers we are being given, are wrong.

[thehovel]

15 vehicles in file, the front one is doing 100kph, I 'll bet the last one is doing barely 80kph. And no one's going to get pissed off??:bs:

Ants might keep a single file without the concertina effect but humans can't.

Wrong !!!! When a group of bikes are in line and the front bike is doing 100km the bike 8 back has to do 120-130kph just to keep up.
I rode a CX400 being the smallest bike I went out in front. I had to make sure that I didn't go over 100kph or I'd get bitched at. One ride one of my regular riders was leading I was #2 at the destination asked "why the speed" he replied I thought that you rode at that speed all the time. It opened my eyes a bit.

[Zedder]

[QUOTE=Jay GTI;1130643194]Slightly less I’ve had a bad day at work post this time...

Nothing is going to change until TPTB stop misrepresenting the situation and to make matters worse, generating revenue from it.

The same applies to ACC etc etc.

[willytheekid]

Yes. No speed is safe completely. But as a society we have to travel about. Its important for social, financial, actually so many reasons.

So, as a democratic society we elect people to make decisions on the balance between the need to travel pitted against the safety of the whole. At this time in history we have the limits set by various democratically elected government stratas.

Those strata employ and direct various activites around enforcing such limits as are set.

And this is where the discussion started.

And it is the responcibility of New Zealand police to review these new recommendations & laws that are suggested by these "democratically elected government stratas", and to make an educated call if there new law's etc are actualy in the publics best interest and if they will add to the publics actual Roadsafety!...not to just blindly agree with them in the name of profit and greed!

Just imagine the impact the police could make if you all put such effort into catching REAL criminals like burglars and such....but that would take actual police work!, involve making an effort!, and actually working WITH the public....but theres no easy profit involved, no promise's of more funding etc...aye! (And yet every year - they cut your funding!!...and you call Akzle stupid??)

Sorry to say it mate...but all I heard yesterday, from all around the country!(I make hundreds of calls a day) and in our sizable office, was the same thing, over an over...."See the revenue collectors are out again for xmas!...do they not know we are struggling to feed our fucking familys!...maggots!!...fuck them!...sell outs!!...Govt whores!!"

So there ya go Ras...please go back to your boss and deliver the message from the public of New Zealand...we are sick of being milked!...Sick of being sold out by those who are meant to represent & protect us.
So get ready for a rough xmas shift boys, because it sounds like you just pissed off the entire nation...again!:facepalm: (Its like the NZ Police are making an EFFORT to make the public hate and resent them??)



ps...http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9447217/Rental-car-was-on-wrong-side-of-road - its called giving away license's!, a bloody good place to start if you lot REALLY want to keep your fellow kiwis safe on our roads...focus on the REAL problems!, not the most profitable!!


-Ride safe Ras:love:...we know your just the messenger, and we truly do appriciate your paitence in listening to our concerns/Bitching, From my family to yours, have a safe & merry xmas:)

[caspernz]

I must say tho; with public confidence & respect in cops at an all time low, what better way to boost public perception than to further piss people off. :tugger:

Goes further than that. The wedge between Joe Public and Mr Plod is one thing. But the regular Mr Plods who are annoyed with their own hierarchy for being taken down this path have a simple answer. I have heard this first hand from several boys in blue; it's one thing to have the silly tolerance, it's quite another to actually enforce it rigidly. No use if you get sprung by a HP fella who believes that 5 clicks over is a crime of course...:brick:

Oh well, if it's any consolation to the two wheeled fraternity...heavy vehicles have been living by that 4 kmh tolerance for some years. Still there's selective enforcement of that rule, with the big picture normally taken into account, unless you start off with a bad attitude when having the roadside chat of course :baby:

[swbarnett]

did you read the rest of my post numbnuts? I agree with you. On a principled basis even.
Yes, I did get that. That's why I didn't direct the answer directly at you. Sorry if that was unclear.

[swbarnett]

Okay, so inattention is the greatest causal factor.

So, when those inattentive people crash, is it better for them to be going faster or slower?

The cause matters, but beyond that, the outcome is heavily influenced by the energy imparted at impact.

Just a fact. Sorry for being so dull.
Fact 1: Risk of injury is proportional to impact velocity.

Fact 2: Risk of accident is not proportional to travelling velocity.

Fact 3: Risk of accident is proportional to level of inattention.

Therefore:
Fact 4: Risk of injury is proportional to the product of level of inattention and impact velocity.

Fact 5: Attentive drivers travelling fast are way more likely to avoid injury than attentive drivers travelling slow.

Penalise inattention, not speed. And stop throwing inattention in the "too hard basket".

[chasio]

Thats not really a worry compaired to getting a big ticket in the interest of saftey when overtaking when a safe speed may be as high as 120-130km. In such a situation I put my safety
first irresppective of the speed I get up to. Luckily I do not feel the urge to overtake that much and am happy to wait for a passing lane mostly.

Totally agree and if I decide to do 130 or whatever and get pinged, no problem. It was a conscious choice to do so and I'll pay the price.

My beef is that a low tolerance is at least misguided and a distraction from the real task at hand and at worst both a distraction on the road (reducing safety) AND a manipulative way of taxing the populace.

Jay GTI makes some very good points in a post that sadly will probably be too long to hold the attention of many readers...

[chasio]

...
Fact 5: Attentive drivers travelling fast are way more likely to avoid injury than attentive drivers travelling slow.
...

Either I am missing your point, or there is a missing in- prefix on your second "attentive". I concede that both are possible.

[SPman]

Fact 5: Attentive drivers travelling fast are way more likely to avoid injury than attentive drivers travelling slow.


Should that not be Inattentive drivers travelling slow........?

They do the same thing over here, allied with double demerits - it's the same scenario that NZ follows - Aus tries it out, makes shitloads of cash, so NZ follows.....do you have double demerits yet?

So, we have a speedometer that is legally meant to be within a +/- 5% accuracy...and at 100 kph, they introduce a + 4% tolerance!..................

[Ocean1]

Penalise inattention, not speed. And stop throwing inattention in the "too hard basket".

But it is too hard. When made responsible for an impossible answer, ask another question. You won't substantially change human behaviour, so change what you can: the environment and the vehicle. There's a reason those two variables have been responsible for almost all of the historical improvements in injury rate amongst road users: improvements are actually possible.

There's a reason rule changes and enforcement are responsible for bugger all: they assume you can change human behaviour. Innatention is impossible to quantify to begin with, and impossible for any human to provide sufficient attention 100% of the time to avoid every concievable eventuality.

Give the heavy handed enforcement bullshit up, make it safer to be human.

[rastuscat]

Fact 1: Risk of injury is proportional to impact velocity.

Fact 2: Risk of accident is not proportional to travelling velocity.

Fact 3: Risk of accident is proportional to level of inattention.

Therefore:
Fact 4: Risk of injury is proportional to the product of level of inattention and impact velocity.

Fact 5: Attentive drivers travelling fast are way more likely to avoid injury than attentive drivers travelling slow.

Penalise inattention, not speed. And stop throwing inattention in the "too hard basket".

Totally agree.

How do we do that?

[Swoop]

Good one I say. I have no sympathy for people that speed or break the law. The govt needs to get money from somewhere and I'd rather it come from the dumbarses out there instead from honest law abiding citizens. Sure I've had the occasional speeding ticket but I know the risks and am prepared to accept the punishment should I get caught.
Eh?
A bit of a contradictory statement.

Anyway, who cares if someone passes you?
I drive on the left and am quite happy if some lambo/ferrari/porche zipps by at 200?

Be concerned with the retarded cockfags who run red lights!



I don't think it's been posted yet? Here's the new P.I.G.mobiles in mention
The new HQ's will look TOTALLY cool out on the roads!

[Zedder]

Totally agree.

How do we do that?

That Professor Regan I posted about earlier has written a book on the subject: http://www.ashgate.com/isbn/9781409425854

[Jay GTI]

Jay GTI.... in a post that sadly will probably be too long to hold the attention of many readers...

Yeah I know, but I felt bad about the last time I commented on a similar thread, so wanted to put a bit more effort in this time. A little too much effort, as it turned out...

[Paul in NZ]

Totally agree.

How do we do that?

Eh? Sorry I missed that bit... What did you say again?

Look - this is all nice and great but I'm with the rest. I'm over it... 4kph allowance?? FFS this is getting stupid, I'll be riding around looking at the damn speedo all the time and not the road.

[onearmedbandit]

It was said to me by a person who has some idea/experience that ACC were a major contributor to road safety funding. And for that 'investment' they want to see returns, ie less carnage on the roads.

[Zedder]

Eh? Sorry I missed that bit... What did you say again?

Look - this is all nice and great but I'm with the rest. I'm over it... 4kph allowance?? FFS this is getting stupid, I'll be riding around looking at the damn speedo all the time and not the road.

Yep, it is getting stupid, but rtc doesn't work like that. He could have kept quiet, done nothing and just keep taking the money.

[jasonu]

Yawn. Told ya this would happen.

So what? It's still totally optional to get ticketed.

Don't want to? Don't speed.

But is doing 105kph on a dead straight road with perfect driving conditions, eventhough it exceeds the posted limit of 100kph, really dangerous enough to warrant a ticket?
Nah, it is a money grab and the cops know it even if they don't admit it.

[Swoop]

I remember when the first speed camera was installed in NZ, it was in Birkenhead near where I lived at the time. Shortly after it’s installation, somebody reversed over it, intentionally. One speed camera in New Zealand and within weeks of it operating, it was vandalised. It was a long time ago, but when the person who reversed over it went to court, I seem to remember him saying he did it because it was revenue collecting and not about road safety. Don’t hold me on that one, though.
Small point.
1st was on East Coast Rd close to where Constellation now joins it.

Do you know what was on the first film developed from that camera? The same car going past, time and time again. The same naked arses hanging out the windows!
The same fake rego plate... "FUCK U".

That info comes straight from the Taka cops... who thought it was hilarious!

[Akzle]

And it is the responcibility of New Zealand police to review these new recommendations & laws that are suggested by these "democratically elected government stratas", and to make an educated call if there new law's etc are actualy in the publics best interest and if they will add to the publics actual Roadsafety!...not to just blindly agree with them in the name of profit and greed!


actually, i dont believe thats the cops responsibility at all. I dont expect anyone else to do anything for me.

The govt pays the pigs to enforce company policy.

If you want to see change, you have to be change.
Ie, do what the fuck you want and educate police if/when you deal with them.
Some even believe theyre doing a good job and that the rules are good.
Some are very small people.

But if i can help one flailing robin unto its nest again...

[nzmikey]

Chch people, PM me and I'll fill you in on a awesome stretch my buddies and I know about where the cops can't ticket you. There's sometimes cops on it but it's mean cause you can just go by them and they can't ticket ya. t's fuckin meeeeeean.

You posted that on reddit aye ..

[nzmikey]

Huh. Looks like I'm coming down to Chch for a visit then!

its a fucking race track ... he is being a twat

[Zedder]

its a fucking race track ... he is being a twat

But give him some credit, he's very very good at it.

[Zedder]

actually, i dont believe thats the cops responsibility at all. I dont expect anyone else to do anything for me.

The govt pays the pigs to enforce company policy.

If you want to see change, you have to be change.
Ie, do what the fuck you want and educate police if/when you deal with them.
Some even believe theyre doing a good job and that the rules are good.
Some are very small people.

But if i can help one flailing robin unto its nest again...

It's true, Michael Jackson is alive!

[nzmikey]

I don't think it's been posted yet? Here's the new P.I.G.mobiles in mention


I am 99% sure that if I leave my bike in 1st ... I could out run the HQ ...

but if I was on the gixxer I would have to push it to give the HQ a chance tho

[Angel_of_Metal]

its a fucking race track ... he is being a twat

Yeah I got that the post after I wrote that. Hence why I haven't replied :Playnice:

[nzmikey]

But give him some credit, he's very very good at it.

Yeah I figured that the more I have been reading .... I think he is trying to compete with Akzle

[nzmikey]

Yeah I got that the post after I wrote that. Hence why I haven't replied :Playnice:

Yeah seen that ... it is also not 1st time that I have seen it today ... was posted on another forum as well ... was not funny then either

[Zedder]

Yeah I figured that the more I have been reading .... I think he is trying to compete with Akzle

Yeah, but at least Akzle has a modicum of humour, the other guy just comes across as plain nasty.

[Angel_of_Metal]

Yeah seen that ... it is also not 1st time that I have seen it today ... was posted on another forum as well ... was not funny then either

Ahh apologies, in that case he is indeed being a twat :)

[Akzle]

It's true, Michael Jackson is alive!

i dont understand the question? I think you mean elvis. I have corn.

[Zedder]

i dont understand the question? I think you mean elvis. I have corn.

There was no question. Believe me, it's Michael J...

[chasio]

Yeah I know, but I felt bad about the last time I commented on a similar thread, so wanted to put a bit more effort in this time. A little too much effort, as it turned out...

FWIW, I thought it was a good post :)

[Jay GTI]

Small point.
1st was on East Coast Rd close to where Constellation now joins it.

Do you know what was on the first film developed from that camera? The same car going past, time and time again. The same naked arses hanging out the windows!
The same fake rego plate... "FUCK U".

That info comes straight from the Taka cops... who thought it was hilarious!

Yeah hence the disclaimers in that part, long time ago and my memory of that time is patchy at best (first year of not living at home, I was making the most of it :) ). The Birkenhead one wouldn't have been far off the first, but I still remember driving past it seeing it pancaked.

[Jay GTI]

FWIW, I thought it was a good post :)

thanks, at least it wasn't entirely wasted effort then :)

[swbarnett]

Yeah, thing is, laws have to be enforcable to be effective.

I'd love to have a law that allows better drivers to go faster than fuckwits, but that'd mean setting up a system to define who the fuckwits are.

So we make a law for everyone based on the fuckwits. Because they do exist, so we gotta allow for them.
That's the most pathetic thing I've ever heard.

If our pre-historic ancestors had had that kind of thinking we'd still be living in caves.

[swbarnett]

Either I am missing your point, or there is a missing in- prefix on your second "attentive". I concede that both are possible.
You are correct. The second "attentive" should've been "inattentave".

[swbarnett]

Totally agree.

How do we do that?
Hard question I know. However, one thing you don't do is ignore it and go onto something that's easier but of no consequence.

The doctor's motto should also apply to politicians and cops - "First do no harm!"

[Robbo]

Look - this is all nice and great but I'm with the rest. I'm over it... 4kph allowance?? FFS this is getting stupid, I'll be riding around looking at the damn speedo all the time and not the road.

Yep, totally agree Paul, it is complete bullshit and just revenue collecting. I always thought the traffic police were meant to be keeping our roads safer and concentrating on issues like..Running red lights, tailgating, failing to keep left, using mobile phones while operating a vehicle, driving at dangerous speeds (not 4km over) inconsiderate driving, not indicating turns etc. Obviously i was mistaken as i rarely ever see them carrying out these functions but often see them parked up having a coffee and a doughnut while watching their radar. Get those patrol out of those laybys and motorway off ramps and get out amongst the traffic where the real problems are occuring. Use more mufti cars, but for 4km/hr over?? For fucksake.:mad:

[oneofsix]

That's the most pathetic thing I've ever heard.

If our pre-historic ancestors had had that kind of thinking we'd still be living in caves.

They existed back then too but back then they failed to halt progress by allowing for the "lowest <strike>common</strike> denominator". The same will happen again, speed limits world wide are creeping up.


Hard question I know. However, one thing you don't do is ignore it and go onto something that's easier but of no consequence.

The doctor's motto should also apply to politicians and cops - "First do no harm!"

Cops and Politicians have slight variations on that motto Politicians add "to me" to the end and cops add "that I can get caught for" :lol:

Ok that was a bit harsh on the cops.

[Zedder]

Yeah hence the disclaimers in that part, long time ago and my memory of that time is patchy at best (first year of not living at home, I was making the most of it :) ). The Birkenhead one wouldn't have been far off the first, but I still remember driving past it seeing it pancaked.

Yep, that bloody Birkenhead one, down a dip behind a tree, the bastards!

Incidently your post wasn't any longer than a single page in a novel or a long editorial in a newspaper. At least it had punctuation and paragraphs etc, more than some on here have.

[Hawkeye]

Riding home Tues on Sh1, up the gorge in Welly, I was following the fully logo'd Edge Roadrunner Truck doing 80k. As we got to the 100k zone of the motorway the line of traffic all moved up to around the 100k. 200mtrs later the muppet driving the truck suddenly slowed to 75ish and was wandering all over the road. I get along side to see the total muppet sending a fucking text.
He almost took me out as I went past to get out of his way. Yeah a 4k tolerance would have saved me in that situation. Tui any one!
As has been said by so many already in this thread, it's not the speed, it's the muppet driving.

And yes, I did ring up the radio station and dob the driver in!

[nzmikey]

And yes, I did ring up the radio station and dob the driver in!

While driving I assume ?

[Jay GTI]

Yep, totally agree Paul, it is complete bullshit and just revenue collecting. I always thought the traffic police were meant to be keeping our roads safer and concentrating on issues like..Running red lights, tailgating, failing to keep left, using mobile phones while operating a vehicle, driving at dangerous speeds (not 4km over) inconsiderate driving, not indicating turns etc. Obviously i was mistaken as i rarely ever see them carrying out these functions but often see them parked up having a coffee and a doughnut while watching their radar. Get those patrol out of those laybys and motorway off ramps and get out amongst the traffic where the real problems are occuring. Use more mufti cars, but for 4km/hr over?? For fucksake.:mad:

When they are actually out and about observing traffic, I'm constantly surprised at how many of them themselves are exceeding the speed limit. No blues and twos, just going about their daily duties. If speeding is the hideously awful crime we're constantly being told it is, we should fit every cop car and bike (non-transport and the rest of the force as well) with GPS trackers and make the speed they travel at public information. The technology already exists, it would be simple to do, they could remove the location information and just use the travelled speed vs posted limit... then they could all lead by example, because obviously, it's just a matter of slowing down.

Tui anyone?

[bsasuper]

If you get pulled by the popo for doing 5 over the limit, ask them If you were driving/riding dangerously, to which they will reply you were 5 over the posted speed limit, to which you reply ohh so its just a revenue collection then.

If you are one of these people who cant control your speed at the number on the speed limit sign, ie at a steady forward motion due to being so uncoordinated, maybe you should practice somewhere like a motorcycle training center.

[nzmikey]

If you are one of these people who cant control your speed at the number on the speed limit sign, ie at a steady forward motion due to being so uncoordinated, maybe you should practice somewhere like a motorcycle training center.


Can I offer you a soap box oh holy one ?

[pritch]

In fact, Professor Mike Regan of the University of New South Wales and a 20 year veteran of studies into Transportation Human Factors, believes inattention is the biggest contributing factor in crashes but speed is often wrongly coded as the causal factor.

A few years back there was a British study, from memory speed ranked seventh as the most common cause. The thought was that even this was artificially high due to many accidents being attended by general duties cops rather than specialist traffic police. It was considered that the GD types too readily ascribe speed as the cause.

The various categories ahead of speed included:
Didn't look.
Looked but didn't see.
Misjudged trajectory of own vehicle.
Misjudged trajectory of other vehicle.

All of which looks much more detailed and better thought out than the usual brain dead, "Speed and alcohol may have been factors." that we hear ad nauseum in this country.

[Zedder]

When they are actually out and about observing traffic, I'm constantly surprised at how many of them themselves are exceeding the speed limit. No blues and twos, just going about their daily duties. If speeding is the hideously awful crime we're constantly being told it is, we should fit every cop car and bike (non-transport and the rest of the force as well) with GPS trackers and make the speed they travel at public information. The technology already exists, it would be simple to do, they could remove the location information and just use the travelled speed vs posted limit... then they could all lead by example, because obviously, it's just a matter of slowing down.

Tui anyone?

Well, that balances out yesterdays post nicely. How do you know they're speeding?

[Zedder]

A few years back there was a British study, from memory speed ranked seventh as the most common cause. The thought was that even this was artificially high due to many accidents being attended by general duties cops rather than specialist traffic police. It was considered that the GD types too readily ascribe speed as the cause.

The various categories ahead of speed included:
Didn't look.
Looked but didn't see.
Misjudged trajectory of own vehicle.
Misjudged trajectory of other vehicle.

All of which looks much more detailed and better thought out than the usual brain dead, "Speed and alcohol may have been factors." that we hear ad nauseum in this country.

It's a very interesting subject alright. Did you read about the book Professor Regan has out on the subject which I posted about yesterday?

Hopefully Officer Cat will get a copy and do some good with it.

[bsasuper]

Can I offer you a soap box oh holy one ?

I'm not sure how tall you are mike, I could have thrown that one to high for some people.

[nzmikey]

I'm not sure how tall you are mike, I could have thrown that one to high for some people.

Only short mate 5'5

[bsasuper]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkxJW-LZGz0

Heres one for the soapbox mikey

[willytheekid]

Heres one for the soapbox mikey


:facepalm:...Did you even watch the vid??

90% inattention and mostly examples of dangerous driving...all passed off as speed being the issue at hand

Its EXACTLY! that type of BS Sensationalism that most object too...speed was only a minor factor in nearly ALL of those examples...driving like a complete Fuck-wit was the primary cause!!

And THATS the real problem, while repeat drink drivers, dangerous drivers and un-educated & untested tourists are constantly being given licenses like they are some sort of fucking right!, you will always see this sort of senseless deaths on our roads

But you just keep supporting the BS "speed kills" propoganda<_<, even when the actual stats prove the above- (The same stats that the police no longer release to the public or media...as they prove this is about $$, not safety!)...stupidity, poor driving skills or a courts lack of balls! to take dangerous drivers off our roads are what the real issues are...not ripping fellow kiwis off for extremely minor speed infractions.

...how about we at least start with real driver education & training?...actual roadsafety & driver testing to PROVE you can actually drive safely on NZ roads...instead of the current, "great!, you can parallel park!...learn the rest as ya go!" system.

[Scuba_Steve]

Propaganda video
Heres one for the soapbox mikey

Again a lot of strawmans to try & push the agenda, lets take a closer look shall we
1. Russia's a different breed
2. Distraction NOT speed
3. obviously had a grudge
4. That ones on the pedestrian "speeding" or not wouldn't change nothing
5. Distraction NOT speed
6. Running red's NOT speed
7. Looked like it was headed for a roll through
8. Another driver that can't & an idiot holding a baby, not speed related
9. inpatient moron, unfortunately a more & more common sight thanks to the speed scam
10. yea that's realistic...
11. This ain't America... yet. But again a failure of the licensing system NOT speed
12. Would have been just an idiot but it's a parked car on tracks & the vid has the TopGear name at the top
13. parked cars on a rail line. What's the price of fish where you are?
14. America
15. China
16. Another bad decision nothing to do with speed
17. Intersection running NOT speed
18. Running the cops
19. Nothing to do with "speeding" in-fact had he been going faster that could have been avoided
20. about the most realistic one yet 'cept maybe he should have been wearing his glasses if he couldn't see the car in the same lane ahead; vehicles don't magically spawn on roads
21. running cops
22. Moron in drivers seat NOT speed
23. running red
24. crossing centre line
25. fuck knows what up there, obviously too fast for conditions
26. too fast for conditions
27. got what he deserved & I'd say another distraction
28. racing comes with it's own dangers
29. just gets too erratic now

Wow so almost 30 "don't speed" propaganda clips yet only a few could actually be argued as speed which even then would just be too fast for conditions

[Jay GTI]

Well, that balances out yesterdays post nicely. How do you know they're speeding?

Because I was when they overtook me.

[pritch]

...stupidity, poor driving skills or a courts lack of balls! to take dangerous drivers off our roads are what the real issues are...not ripping fellow kiwis off for extremely minor speed infractions.



As has been pointed out previously, there are generally three ways to improve safety on the roads: engineering, education, and enforcement. Two of those cost money, one rakes it in. No prizes for guessing which is the priority.

[Zedder]

Because I was when they overtook me.

All the ones that you "constantly see"? You must have a lot of speeding tickets.

[Jay GTI]

All the ones that you "constantly see"? You must have a lot of speeding tickets.

Oddly not, but really if you want to argue semantics...

See if you spend a reasonable amount of time on the motorways in and around Auckland, as I do, you can observe, as I do, Police vehicles of all types travelling along with the flow of traffic. Occasionally, when the traffic isn’t heavy, the flow of traffic in one or two lanes will be above the speed limit. Usually marginally and within what I would consider a sensible threshold, which is of course my opinion only.

Over the past couple of years I have mentally made notes of occasions where Police vehicles have either been matching my GPS-based speed, or in fact have been travelling faster than me, even though I am speeding. If they are travelling faster than me it is usually only slightly above my speed, in that I will see them in my mirrors and 10 minutes later, they will go past me. When I see such behaviour, I assume (correctly as it turns out in every example so far) that these Cops are either not traffic, or have no real interest in pinging people who are not, as far as they can see, doing anything dangerous, other than travelling just outside the limit and accepted threshold. So I generally don’t adjust my speed. This sort of policing of speed I am happy with, it’s sensible.

As for the terminology, well ok “constantly see” is ambiguous, as generalist statements tend to be, so sure you could take that statement as me saying every third car on SH1 is a speed cop and call me a wildly exaggerating idiot, if it makes you happy enough to do so. I’d say it’s more somewhere between once a week to a couple of times over a month and I include all types of Police vehicles, from the Traffic branch to those poor bastards subjected to having to drive a Holden Astra. But it’s a mental note and I know that mental notes are about as accurate as using tree rings to measure earth temperature 2000 years ago. So even that is probably incorrect, but this is a forum, we’re discussing a well-worn subject and I don’t always articulate myself as well as I want to. If it helps, I’ll take back the “constantly” part, my bad.

But regardless of all that, I’m not actually too fussed about how traffic is policed, at the moment. I have had tickets, they have been for speeds I know I shouldn’t have been doing, I accepted them, paid them, took the demerits and got on with my life. My issue, is the way we’re slowly being conditioned to accept a 4kph tolerance for 2 bloody months. Which may end up being permanent. Which is being done by using cooked stats, emotive statements and claims that are not achievable. We will never have a zero road toll while people are in charge of the vehicles they are travelling in. It’s a scam.

[Zedder]

Oddly not, but really if you want to argue semantics...

See if you spend a reasonable amount of time on the motorways in and around Auckland, as I do, you can observe, as I do, Police vehicles of all types travelling along with the flow of traffic. Occasionally, when the traffic isn’t heavy, the flow of traffic in one or two lanes will be above the speed limit. Usually marginally and within what I would consider a sensible threshold, which is of course my opinion only.

Over the past couple of years I have mentally made notes of occasions where Police vehicles have either been matching my GPS-based speed, or in fact have been travelling faster than me, even though I am speeding. If they are travelling faster than me it is usually only slightly above my speed, in that I will see them in my mirrors and 10 minutes later, they will go past me. When I see such behaviour, I assume (correctly as it turns out in every example so far) that these Cops are either not traffic, or have no real interest in pinging people who are not, as far as they can see, doing anything dangerous, other than travelling just outside the limit and accepted threshold. So I generally don’t adjust my speed. This sort of policing of speed I am happy with, it’s sensible.

As for the terminology, well ok “constantly see” is ambiguous, as generalist statements tend to be, so sure you could take that statement as me saying every third car on SH1 is a speed cop and call me a wildly exaggerating idiot, if it makes you happy enough to do so. I’d say it’s more somewhere between once a week to a couple of times over a month and I include all types of Police vehicles, from the Traffic branch to those poor bastards subjected to having to drive a Holden Astra. But it’s a mental note and I know that mental notes are about as accurate as using tree rings to measure earth temperature 2000 years ago. So even that is probably incorrect, but this is a forum, we’re discussing a well-worn subject and I don’t always articulate myself as well as I want to. If it helps, I’ll take back the “constantly” part, my bad.

But regardless of all that, I’m not actually too fussed about how traffic is policed, at the moment. I have had tickets, they have been for speeds I know I shouldn’t have been doing, I accepted them, paid them, took the demerits and got on with my life. My issue, is the way we’re slowly being conditioned to accept a 4kph tolerance for 2 bloody months. Which may end up being permanent. Which is being done by using cooked stats, emotive statements and claims that are not achievable. We will never have a zero road toll while people are in charge of the vehicles they are travelling in. It’s a scam.

Nah, I just wanted to know your methodology, or lack thereof.

Incidently, I hope you liked my positive critique of your post yesterday. It's always good to get feedback.

[Akzle]

Where the new limit will possibly help is when somthing runs into your path eg an animal or a kid as you will have a fraction longer to slam on the brakes. Most accidents would not be this type though but they are certainly
a graeter fear for us bikers than car drivers.

there are exactly fuckall situations when 'slamming on the brakes' will make things better. I wish you many crashes.

[swbarnett]

Where the new limit will possibly help is when somthing runs into your path eg an animal or a kid as you will have a fraction longer to slam on the brakes. Most accidents would not be this type though but they are certainly
a graeter fear for us bikers than car drivers.
Or you could go faster and be well past when they "run into your path".

[Jay GTI]

Nah, I just wanted to know your methodology, or lack thereof.

Incidently, I hope you liked my positive critique of your post yesterday. It's always good to get feedback.

Yes and thank you, if I can do nothing else here, I hope I can give people something interesting to read. Although I still think I could work on the old "saying more, using less words" technique.

On reflection, I'm quite embarrased about the use of "constantly see". I'm an engineer, I believe in quantative analysis, not the vague generalisation that was. I should know better.

[The Reibz]

Due to there not being any real police work for the pigs to do they need to resort to this. Hard enough for most people at this time of year as it is.

Ah well, I aint stopping for no cunt this christmas

[Zedder]

Due to there not being any real police work for the pigs to do they need to resort to this. Hard enough for most people at this time of year as it is.

Ah well, I aint stopping for no cunt this christmas

Police 10-7 will probably be filming about then too.

[The Reibz]

Police 10-7 will probably be filming about then too.

Sweet, then I would have finally made it in life.
I will make sure I give you a shout out when they finally catch up mate

[Zedder]

Sweet, then I would have finally made it in life.
I will make sure I give you a shout out when they finally catch up mate

Cool, I'll pick ya up from the Police Station.

[GrayWolf]

Yes. No speed is safe completely. But as a society we have to travel about. Its important for social, financial, actually so many reasons.

So, as a democratic society we elect people to make decisions on the balance between the need to travel pitted against the safety of the whole. At this time in history we have the limits set by various democratically elected government stratas.

Those strata employ and direct various activites around enforcing such limits as are set.

And this is where the discussion started.

However Rastus,

these same democratically elected government officials and Public servants are also the same ones who have just had to send out a Publically driven referendum over sales of SOE's... AFTER the fact, so even if the electorate by referendum show clearly that they do not support or want it? Our illustrious leader Mr Don Key, will carry on his own sweet way.

After all, the public discussion about a 4kph limit for 2 months, and the referendum, keeps the public mind off his other main agenda.. the ERA (employment relations amendments) that get the second reading in Dec. Then he gets to REALLY screw everyone who works.

[Dave-]

Just been down to the shop and had a go at trying to hold consistantly under 54km and could see a lot of rear end collisions happening as people keep their eyes more on the speedo than the road. I would say it is far cheaper to ignore
it and risk a ticket than pay for the consequence of rear ending anyone. Having said that though my bike and car do hold a consistant speed better at 100-104km. Maybe it has something to do with gear ratios but to change down at 50km would have the motor reving too high which would not be good either.

So what you're saying is that you cannot safely operate a vehicle? My grandma has the same problem, she's like 85 and they (quite rightly) took her license away.

[roogazza]

Speed and this speed tolerance thing is not a surprise really is it , this is New Zealand !
We seem to do things a bit different here, I mean if you travel a little bit you'll get the idea.
I mean for all our non smoking plans and regulations you'll find it's just about bloody compulsory to smoke elsewhere.
So for all you rebels out there,suck it up,even the smoke !
I will be. :mad::brick:

[Berg]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.
For a starter, a $30 speed ticket costs more in time, wages, fuel etc than it makes. Secondly, fuck that shit, I make way more revenue sitting at the stop sign down the road where punters cough up $150 per time (one guy in a truck twice in three days) for doing the normal "but I slowed down" rolling stop.
Also 22 cell phone tickets in 5 days at $80 per time, now that's fucken revenue collecting (well that's what most of them told me).
Of note, the lowest speed I've ticketed this year was 118km. Obviously not doing my job properly:rolleyes:

[G4L4XY]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.
For a starter, a $30 speed ticket costs more in time, wages, fuel etc than it makes. Secondly, fuck that shit, I make way more revenue sitting at the stop sign down the road where punters cough up $150 per time (one guy in a truck twice in three days) for doing the normal "but I slowed down" rolling stop.
Also 22 cell phone tickets in 5 days at $80 per time, now that's fucken revenue collecting (well that's what most of them told me).
Of note, the lowest speed I've ticketed this year was 118km. Obviously not doing my job properly:rolleyes:


Bit more of this and you can upgrade ya bike haha ;)

[R650R]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.
Also 22 cell phone tickets in 5 days at $80 per time

I agree as stated before that its not revenue gathering as its not cost effective, except maybe for the speed cameras...
I can't believe how few people are caught on their phones especially when police are doing campaigns specifically on them not that I'm against it. It's another one of those multi tasking skills that some have and some don't...
I'm surprised you didn't mention some of the trucking fines as they are way out of proportion in terms of risk/$ vs other offending.
Forget to put the Hazardous goods placard up??? $2000 fine for driver, $10000 fine for company.
Move truck out of way for next fella, oh well fill in hazardous load plan up the road a bit, whoops forget to stop and do it and again, $2000 fine for driver, $10000 fine for company.
Missing a Hazardous goods info sheet for a particular item on your truck that you or forklift driver didn't notice, $2000 fine for driver, $10000 fine for company.
Never got done for any of these myself but know other that have.
In comparison the real danger to joe public is fatigue but the consequences for dodging the logbook are minor in comparison. There is of course the $25000 fine for a manager/dispatcher encouraging a driver to break law or speed etc but its another one of those things in the too hard basket for enforcement that you just about never hear of it being dished out.

[Robbo]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.
For a starter, a $30 speed ticket costs more in time, wages, fuel etc than it makes. Secondly, fuck that shit, I make way more revenue sitting at the stop sign down the road where punters cough up $150 per time (one guy in a truck twice in three days) for doing the normal "but I slowed down" rolling stop.
Also 22 cell phone tickets in 5 days at $80 per time, now that's fucken revenue collecting (well that's what most of them told me).
Of note, the lowest speed I've ticketed this year was 118km. Obviously not doing my job properly:rolleyes:

Good to see that you're being proactive and dealing with the issues that concern most of us. No complaints there, however fixed speed cameras, both on poles and stationary vans are definitely only revenue collectors as they can't perform any useful duties. You must be one of the few that evaluates speed on its individual merits and circumstances when deciding on the outcome. Well done. :first:

[Scuba_Steve]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.

Well yea, that'd be misguided; this is about Govt money making at the expense of NZs safety

[Zedder]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.
For a starter, a $30 speed ticket costs more in time, wages, fuel etc than it makes. Secondly, fuck that shit, I make way more revenue sitting at the stop sign down the road where punters cough up $150 per time (one guy in a truck twice in three days) for doing the normal "but I slowed down" rolling stop.
Also 22 cell phone tickets in 5 days at $80 per time, now that's fucken revenue collecting (well that's what most of them told me).
Of note, the lowest speed I've ticketed this year was 118km. Obviously not doing my job properly:rolleyes:

Maybe the odd 15 kms over the speed limit ticketing takes a bit off the top as far as time, wages and fuel etc but if the whole driving population is in the catchment potential with the 4km tolerance it's a different story. Also, don't those new hi tec handhelds do most of the work.

However, it's good you have a non rigid view of things like Rastuscat and SD.

Anyway, I'm off for a motorbike ride and will report any experiences with police revenue gathering attempts on my return.

[pritch]

Was reflecting on the 4kph margin and the realisation dawned that it doesn't really affect me personally. It's not as if I was going to be travelling at 110kph anyway, except possibly when slowing to ride through villages/towns en route.:devil2:

[swbarnett]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.
For a starter, a $30 speed ticket costs more in time, wages, fuel etc than it makes.
That's money that would be spent anyway. Even if the equation works out in the negative (which it might in your area but I doubt it nationwide) those $30 tickets will at least offset the money that's already been spent.

And then there are speed cameras. No way in hell is that about slowing people down. you get a "nice" letter from LTNZ saying you were speeding a couple of weeks ago (or more). How many people can remember the circumstances that wre prevelant at the time? Big fail on the "education" through enforcement stakes.

[Dave-]

Safer looking where I am going. If now having to check you speedo more often makes you feel safer dont complain on here if you have a rear end crash.

Here's what I do, I check my speedo often enough, except I keep a lower average speed, so any undulations in the road, variations in speed etc are still under 52kph. It's real simple, try it next time you pop down to the shops.

Don't try to average 50kph, try for 48 or 49.

[R650R]

I have heard that there is a shortage of drivers in the transport induustry. Those fines would explain it. The electrical industry has huge fines if you make a mistake too. We would possibly have the safest roads in the world if penalties were that high for other motorists.

There is no shortage of drivers, there is a shortage of good employers to work for that don't want you to break the law and are willing to spend money maintaining the gear properly. I often pondered the same thought as you, had a mate with high flying job for packaging manufacturer. Big dollars doing design and sales rep combo, SV6 commodore driving all over NZ doing mega hours. Finally caught up with him one day and saw how fatigued he was after repat 20 hour days and mega kms driving car. Although it would be an OSH conviction if he had accident and the right evidence was collected, he would NEVER be done by cops as there is no easy box to tick and no requirement for him to prove adequate rest breaks etc.
And he wouldn't be the only one like this and I guess the govt would know it, but they won't do anything as it would lose too many votes hence once again proving they are not serious about road safety (talking about the govt here, not the cops).

[Tazz]

You'd have fail the attitude test horribly or get an absolute dick of a cop to get handed a ticket for doing 105, but yeah speeding cameras don't discriminate, particularly ones around town that will potentially be pinging you for doing 55?

Can't remember if I posted it or just typed it but to me it seems a bit of a trap that you can change the rolling diameter of your tyres by 5%, still pass a WOF but be done for speeding because you're speedo is out and the margin for error that is the WOF rules and enforced by law don't line up with the speed limits enforced (and what is the margin of error on the death rays these days? Would be pretty small I'd imagine but it adds up)

But meh, touch wood etc that I make it through another summer without any tickets.


Was reflecting on the 4kph margin and the realisation dawned that it doesn't really affect me personally. It's not as if I was going to be travelling at 110kph anyway, except possibly when slowing to ride through villages/towns en route.:devil2:

:lol::lol::lol:

The faster you go, the sooner you get there, meaning you're off the road quicker, therefore making yourself and the population safer by default is the way it works right?

[Berries]

And he wouldn't be the only one like this and I guess the govt would know it, but they won't do anything as it would lose too many votes hence once again proving they are not serious about road safety (talking about the govt here, not the cops).
Fatigue is the big one, I have no doubt about that. On NZ roads it only takes a second to cross the edge line and have two wheels in the gravel or on the grass and then unless you are a rally driver you have had it, sideways back across the road in to someone else or straight in to a tree or a well placed power pole. There was a big one early this morning just down the road from me. The question is, what do you do about it? Log books might be one way of recording driving hours but they are of absolutely no use to someone who had a late night, managed a few hours of interrupted sleep due to the kids then spent the morning at work before a 200km drive on a warm afternoon. The driver/rider has to recognise they are fatigued and know that they have to stop driving. Get pulled over and you'll be wide awake straight away so that won't work.

Apart from in-vehicle technology what can be done? The only thing I can think of is providing many more rest areas with decent facilities. Not just a pull off area with a shagged out wooden table, but clean toilets, coffee stops etc etc. Lots of $$$$$ but people need to be encouraged to stop for a break. If the Government were serious about tackling the fatigue issue they would be doing more than having the occasional sausage sizzle on a long weekend. Unfortunately it cannot be measured like speed and alcohol so cannot be enforced like speed and alcohol hence the current focus.


and what is the margin of error on the death rays these days? Would be pretty small I'd imagine
I am guessing +/- 3% which means the 4km/h tolerance is as low as they can go before ticketing people doing a true 100km/h.

[Robbo]

Now these guys have got the right attitude..:innocent:

[caspernz]

There is no shortage of drivers, there is a shortage of good employers to work for that don't want you to break the law and are willing to spend money maintaining the gear properly.

Damn straight!! I was gonna write something along those lines, but yeah it's as simple as that really. At times when I've gone for a chat with a prospective employer I've voiced the sentiment of the shortage being in suitable employers...funnily enough it doesn't go down well :baby::wacko:

That said, find a decent operator to work for and it's all dandy :banana:

[caspernz]

Due to there not being any real police work for the pigs to do they need to resort to this. Hard enough for most people at this time of year as it is.

Ah well, I aint stopping for no cunt this christmas

Don't worry, the "terminate pursuit threshold" has been lowered as well...so even your slow Busa will do ok :lol:

[Zedder]

I did intend to try a variety of speedo checks and scanning techniques on my ride today but gave up due to an unusually high wind factor. My homeward run was wind assisted while the outgoing one was the opposite! Brakes on one route and fuel consumption on the other were the victims today.

No revenue to the Gubbermint again though, apart from usual onroad costs, and I certainly think if I had have been driving a van I would've been literally sailing home with little throttle use.

[zeocen]

Having a chuckle about those here who think this is police revenue collecting.
For a starter, a $30 speed ticket costs more in time, wages, fuel etc than it makes. Secondly, fuck that shit, I make way more revenue sitting at the stop sign down the road where punters cough up $150 per time (one guy in a truck twice in three days) for doing the normal "but I slowed down" rolling stop.
Also 22 cell phone tickets in 5 days at $80 per time, now that's fucken revenue collecting (well that's what most of them told me).
Of note, the lowest speed I've ticketed this year was 118km. Obviously not doing my job properly:rolleyes:

If you want some serious money, tell one of your Auckland police mates to set up shop on corner of Union and Nelson street in the morning. The amount of red light runners there would save the financial crisis.

There actually used to be a motorcycle police officer that would catch the odd red light runner a year or so ago in that spot, but he was never not rushed off his feet. As soon as he settled back into his monitoring spot, he'd just have to set off again to get the last of ~8 cars running the latest red light.

[BMWST?]

If you want some serious money, tell one of your Auckland police mates to set up shop on corner of Union and Nelson street in the morning. The amount of red light runners there would save the financial crisis.

There actually used to be a motorcycle police officer that would catch the odd red light runner a year or so ago in that spot, but he was never not rushed off his feet. As soon as he settled back into his monitoring spot, he'd just have to set off again to get the last of ~8 cars running the latest red light.

And then he could also nab all the dimwits who drive into the intersection when they cant get out of the intersection,so that when the lights turn green for the othr traffic they cant move because th eintersection is blocked by people who dont look beyond their own nose

[Waihou Thumper]

I don't mind IF in fact it reduces the carnage, which we know it doesn't....
WHY though do we publicly announce it? WHY not just do it...
and for that matter, why also let everyone know where speed cameras are operating.....
IMHO, kind of defeats the purpose...

[fridayflash]

I did intend to try a variety of speedo checks and scanning techniques on my ride today but gave up due to an unusually high wind factor. My homeward run was wind assisted while the outgoing one was the opposite! Brakes on one route and fuel consumption on the other were the victims today.

No revenue to the Gubbermint again though, apart from usual onroad costs, and I certainly think if I had have been driving a van I would've been literally sailing home with little throttle use.

your dead right, its utter madness that when a light goes red, at 6 and sometimes as many as 10 cars will keep trickling through, and as said they only serve to block the oncoming greenlighters adjacent :mad:

[Shadows]

With a little tolerance available it was easy to get around without having to stare at the speedo all of the time. Now I'll just ignore it all together and travel at a speed which feels appropriate by gauging the vibration of my arse cheeks. So fuck your fucking speed limit and kiss my vibrating arse cheeks. Motherfuckers.

[rastuscat]

With a little tolerance available it was easy to get around without having to stare at the speedo all of the time. Now I'll just ignore it all together and travel at a speed which feels appropriate by gauging the vibration of my arse cheeks. So fuck your fucking speed limit and kiss my vibrating arse cheeks. Motherfuckers.

Nicely put. A well constructed final sentence or two.

Now, back to normal discussions with reason and logic.

[Scuba_Steve]

Now, back to normal discussions with reason and logic.

Like ...
Get rid of the speed scam cause it's a misuse of police resources & time, & it makes the roads more dangerous than they need be while endangering the lives of all NZers

Keep the speed scam, cause, Govt $$$. Fuck safety!


Theres the 2 sides of the discussion with the logic & reasoning behind them, not a hell of alot more to it really.

[zeocen]

Nicely put. A well constructed final sentence or two.

Now, back to normal discussions with reason and logic.

Your discussions, reasons and logic are just as ludicrous. Please don't act like you're an authority on education.

[R650R]

Actually discussing this over a few beers at the club yesterday some of us came to the conclusion that nothings changed really. The previous tolerance was just some pseudo public relations exercise that could be ignored if the cop wanted to and the bad ones are still free to make stuff up just like in the movies... And if you previously cruised around the 110 tolerance you probably did xxx km/h while overtaking anyway. Lets hope someone dying in a real emergency isn't denied help because the call centre is swamped by *555 calls about someone overtaking at 105km/h http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11158462 Looks like they had already made the decision few weeks back and aware of the ramifications "...They had cut the numbers of 111 and *555 communication centre staff by "natural attrition" - but up to 18 are now being hired back on casual contracts to deal with an extra 35,000 calls already logged this year, and a further upsurge expected to swamp police over summer..."


290474

[roogazza]

[QUOTE=Tazz;1130644479]You'd have fail the attitude test horribly or get an absolute dick of a cop to get handed a ticket for doing 105?

I don't know so much nowdays ? It doesn't seem that discretion comes into it so much with the modern gen traffic cop ? For that matter for the GD police either from what I'm hearing.
From their side of it, they are dealing with the average person who doesn't have the respect once held with the police either.

[Zedder]

Actually discussing this over a few beers at the club yesterday some of us came to the conclusion that nothings changed really. The previous tolerance was just some pseudo public relations exercise that could be ignored if the cop wanted to and the bad ones are still free to make stuff up just like in the movies... And if you previously cruised around the 110 tolerance you probably did xxx km/h while overtaking anyway. Lets hope someone dying in a real emergency isn't denied help because the call centre is swamped by *555 calls about someone overtaking at 105km/h http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11158462 Looks like they had already made the decision few weeks back and aware of the ramifications "...They had cut the numbers of 111 and *555 communication centre staff by "natural attrition" - but up to 18 are now being hired back on casual contracts to deal with an extra 35,000 calls already logged this year, and a further upsurge expected to swamp police over summer..."


290474

Nah, it'll be sweet as. The lowering of the tolerance is such a "magic bullet" that there won't be any problems. Those casual workers will just be coffee and donut waiters.

Meanwhile in real crime, if you're an ex gang member who repeatedly punches a cop, whose in a car with his family, you only get 110 hours community service. Somethings really really wrong here.

[awa355]

Followed a police car into Te Awamutu this afternoon. Through the dip within the 50k zone the cop car accelerated away from me, ( I was possibly doing about 53.5kph at the time ). He pulled over a bit further on and stopped.

I can only assume he was writing himself a speeding ticket. :Playnice:

[Scuba_Steve]

It's good to see this is working already, I travel at off peak times yet it's like I'm back travelling in peak with roads more congested & dangerous than they need be with higher levels of road rage building up & tail gating oh the tail gating
... Operation slower dangerous roads is coming together nicely!

[rastuscat]

Followed a police car into Te Awamutu this afternoon. Through the dip within the 50k zone the cop car accelerated away from me, ( I was possibly doing about 53.5kph at the time ). He pulled over a bit further on and stopped.

I can only assume he was writing himself a speeding ticket. :Playnice:

It's really easy for the management to make a media statement about how we'll be rigidly enforcing the 4 kmh tolerance.

It's another issue altogether to get the troops to buy into it.

[Tazz]

It's good to see this is working already, I travel at off peak times yet it's like I'm back travelling in peak with roads more congested & dangerous than they need be with higher levels of road rage building up & tail gating oh the tail gating
... Operation slower dangerous roads is coming together nicely!

I'm definitely not all for such a low tolerance, but peoples utter stupidity and lack of patience can hardly be blamed on the Police force.

Not saying I'm perfect, but if the worst things in life that happen to you are people going slower than you would like to on the road and it is worth getting fired up over, then maybe it is time to re-evaluate things a little :weird:

Sometimes I think people just need to take a second and remember that as soon as you pass that person in front holding 'everyone' up, you're only going to end up behind another, or a truck, or a tractor, or the council cutting the grass/trees on the side of the road, wildlife, road works, good looking joggers, accidents and the list goes on, so why get so worked up?

[Zedder]

It's really easy for the management to make a media statement about how we'll be rigidly enforcing the 4 kmh tolerance.

It's another issue altogether to get the troops to buy into it.

That tells ya something then rtc. Mind you, they aren't then carrying out their duty as sworn members of the police force. Break out the wet bus tickets!

Heh, imagine if the armed forces worked that way? Optional shooting of the enemy...

[swbarnett]

Heh, imagine if the armed forces worked that way? Optional shooting of the enemy...
I've been told that only 10% of the bullets fired in the American civil war were actually aimed at anyone.

[swbarnett]

I'm definitely not all for such a low tolerance, but peoples utter stupidity and lack of patience can hardly be blamed on the Police force.
What I beileve he's getting at is that the traffic had effectively found the "sweet spot" where most of it was in harmony. Now that some drivers are looking at their speedos instead of what's around them this harmony is gone.

[chasio]

It's really easy for the management to make a media statement about how we'll be rigidly enforcing the 4 kmh tolerance.

It's another issue altogether to get the troops to buy into it.

Long may discretion reign. But all the reportedly low tolerance cameras (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/motoring/news/article.cfm?c_id=9&objectid=11165939) lack it.

No doubt the pollies will declare the "trial" a great success (unless there is utter carnage; hopefully not) and once the cameras have been changed, what are the chances of changing them back in February? Pretty slim.

Still, the local camera seemed disinterested in pinging the stream of 60km/h traffic going past it today, unless the flash is invisible these days(?)

[Zedder]

I've been told that only 10% of the bullets fired in the American civil war were actually aimed at anyone.

The lack of shooting is understandable in a civil war, I would have thought it would be higher actually.

However, I read somewhere it was 15-20% of US troops didn't fire at the enemy in WW2.

[Zedder]

Long may discretion reign. But all the reportedly low tolerance cameras (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/motoring/news/article.cfm?c_id=9&objectid=11165939) lack it.

No doubt the pollies will declare the "trial" a great success (unless there is utter carnage; hopefully not) and once the cameras have been changed, what are the chances of changing them back in February? Pretty slim.

Still, the local camera seemed disinterested in pinging the stream of 60km/h traffic going past it today, unless the flash is invisible these days(?)

There's lots more cops than cameras of course so they can get more revenue from traffic stops with other offences happening.

It probably won't be long before there's a camera that can sense alcohol, drugs and not wearing seat belts etc.

[Murray]

Sometimes I think people just need to take a second and remember that as soon as you pass that person in front holding 'everyone' up, you're only going to end up behind the council cutting the grass/trees on the side of the road, so why get so worked up?

Won't happen in Auckland

:killingme:killingme:killingme

[James Deuce]

Just set the flashing light on the car dash to 104 km/hr and am in the process of a buying motorcycle that can only do 98 km/hr. There's a solution to anything. Technically, alcohol IS a solution.

[caspernz]

It's really easy for the management to make a media statement about how we'll be rigidly enforcing the 4 kmh tolerance.

It's another issue altogether to get the troops to buy into it.

That seems to be the consensus in the areas that I frequent...:laugh:

The only problem that remains is the odd stickler for the 'by the book' approach. Maybe they'll be the ones selected to drive the funny coloured HP cars :eek:

[Big Dave]

Technically, alcohol IS a solution.

OT - but I like doing the Mascot match-ups.

Knights V Dragons, Cowboys V Redskins, Broncos V Colts etc etc.

In Aus cricket at the moment is possibly the best yet.

I give you the:

Alcohol. Think Again Western Warriors V The Queensland XXXX Gold Bulls.

The piss heads lost.

[jasonu]

However, I read somewhere it was 15-20% of US troops didn't fire at the enemy in WW2.

Prolly the ones pealing the spuds and fixing the tanks.

[Zedder]

Prolly the ones pealing the spuds and fixing the tanks.

Nope, in the infantry as of early 1945, that was 14%. There were 68% in combat and the remainder in HQ/admin.

[Tazz]

That tells ya something then rtc. Mind you, they aren't then carrying out their duty as sworn members of the police force. Break out the wet bus tickets!

Heh, imagine if the armed forces worked that way? Optional shooting of the enemy...

Eh? Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it worded that they issue tickets at their own discretion? And they go through training to qualify them to do so?

If you have a problem with that being the case, I think you'll find yourself on a lonely side of the fence :bleh:


I've been told that only 10% of the bullets fired in the American civil war were actually aimed at anyone.

88.95684% of statistics are made up on the spot =P


Long may discretion reign. But all the reportedly low tolerance cameras (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/motoring/news/article.cfm?c_id=9&objectid=11165939) lack it.

No doubt the pollies will declare the "trial" a great success (unless there is utter carnage; hopefully not) and once the cameras have been changed, what are the chances of changing them back in February? Pretty slim.

Still, the local camera seemed disinterested in pinging the stream of 60km/h traffic going past it today, unless the flash is invisible these days(?)

That's a bit rubbish. Annoyed to read that for reasons stated over the page :mad:


There's lots more cops than cameras of course so they can get more revenue from traffic stops with other offences happening.

It probably won't be long before there's a camera that can sense alcohol, drugs and not wearing seat belts etc.

Yeah nah. They are already putting that tech straight into your car. Won't start if you're over the limit. Eventually if all cars have something like that installed they'll have to retire the booze buses :yes:


Won't happen in Auckland

:killingme:killingme:killingme

Lucky for you they're letting it grow out then. Always seem to hit a mower heading up and down the coast. Better than not being able to see past an intersection due to overgrowth though ;)

[Scuba_Steve]

Eh? Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it worded that they issue tickets at their own discretion? And they go through training to qualify them to do so?


Once upon a time, decades ago

[Zedder]

Yeah nah. They are already putting that tech straight into your car. Won't start if you're over the limit. Eventually if all cars have something like that installed they'll have to retire the booze buses :yes:



Yeah nah, they're optional, too costly, don't actually stop the engine and easily defeated.

[Tazz]

Yeah nah, they're optional, too costly, don't actually stop the engine and easily defeated.

For now...

[awa355]

Actually, my biggest concern, is how do I get my scooter to within 4k of the speed limit? :scooter::scooter::scooter:

[Zedder]

For now...

Well, after 30 years of development they still can't get them to work.

[Tazz]

Well, after 30 years of development they still can't get them to work.

Got a source? Would be an interesting read.

Personally I think people not liking change is holding such things back more than that claim, but that is my own opinion. Shit even I don't completely agree with it in principle :laugh: Would give people a chance to whinge about something else for a while though.

[Zedder]

Got a source? Would be an interesting read.

Personally I think people not liking change is holding such things back more than that claim, but that is my own opinion. Shit even I don't completely agree with it in principle :laugh: Would give people a chance to whinge about something else for a while though.

By the look of it things are a bit quiet down your way so you could probably while away the time by doing some research for yourself.

[Tazz]

By the look of it things are a bit quiet down your way so you could probably while away the time by doing some research for yourself.

Yup. Bonus of having two screens when doing web stuff is you can distract yourself nicely.

Thought something like that might be the reply though :tugger:

Well, I better head back to reality ;)

[Zedder]

Yup. Bonus of having two screens when doing web stuff is you can distract yourself nicely.

Thought something like that might be the reply though :tugger:

Well, I better head back to reality ;)

Had enough trolling on KB for today then? Was the child porn too boring for you?

I'm more than happy to provide data for normal people, however, I don't like feeding trolls.

[Tazz]

Had enough trolling on KB for today then? Was the child porn too boring for you?

I'm more than happy to provide data for normal people, however, I don't like feeding trolls.

Nah it looks like you just like to make things up and have thrown your toys out of the cot when someone called you out on it?
You seem to post a lot of 'facts' so I was interested to see if you could back one of them up. From asking for a source to child porn. Not sure how your brain works but entertaining result :lol:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2-pRYwAu0WI/UIOLdH-M5WI/AAAAAAAAKkw/MNSNsXZEFvc/s1600/Don't+argue+with+idiots+they+drag+you+down+to+thei r+level+and+beat+you+with+experience.jpg

On that note, I'm back to the tolerance topic before your experience kicks in ;)

[scumdog]

It's really easy for the management to make a media statement about how we'll be rigidly enforcing the 4 kmh tolerance.

It's another issue altogether to get the troops to buy into it.

True!

I want anybody who gets a ticket for 105kph to scam and post it on this thread...

[Ocean1]

True!

I want anybody who gets a ticket for 105kph to scam and post it on this thread...

Wee Freudian slip there, dude?

[bogan]

True!

I want anybody who gets a ticket for 105kph to scam and post it on this thread...

How would the ticket receiver do the scam? wasn't that the officer's job :whistle:

[scumdog]

Like ...
Get rid of the speed scam cause it's a misuse of police resources & time, & it makes the roads more dangerous than they need be while endangering the lives of all NZers

Keep the speed scam, cause, Govt $$$. Fuck safety!

Theres the 2 sides of the discussion with the logic & reasoning behind them, not a hell of alot more to it really.

He said reason and logic.

You failed on at least one of those...

[Zedder]

Nah it looks like you just like to make things up and have thrown your toys out of the cot when someone called you out on it?
You seem to post a lot of 'facts' so I was interested to see if you could back one of them up. From asking for a source to child porn. Not sure how your brain works but entertaining result :lol:

On that note, I'm back to the tolerance topic before your experience kicks in ;)

You posted the tugger emoticon first and expect me to be nice? You're an even sadder little troll than I thought.

[Tazz]

True!

I want anybody who gets a ticket for 105kph to scam and post it on this thread...

Does that include the indiscriminate 'recalibrated' speed cameras? :bleh:


You posted the tugger emoticon first and expect me to be nice? You're an even sadder little troll than I thought.

Don't take the internet so seriously. You'll live longer.

[Zedder]

Don't take the internet so seriously. You'll live longer.

Well obviously I didn't take you seriously otherwise I would have posted the link to the data...

[roogazza]

It's really easy for the management to make a media statement about how we'll be rigidly enforcing the 4 kmh tolerance.

It's another issue altogether to get the troops to buy into it.

Choose to disobey,if it doesn't sit right.
I've done it and I'm sure many would have rastuscat ?
Some dumb shit has come out of that Beehive.
Discretion, oh the power ! (commonsense more likely)
I've been called a 'Redneck' before. :rolleyes:

[Akzle]

fuck. this thread didn't get any more interesting today.


the limit is 100. if you go ONE kilometer per hour faster than that you're a fucking criminal, regardless of your tyre size or speedo error or any other fucking thing, and you should be put in jail for endangering the lives of everyone.

dont like it? get a better society.