Police getting tougher on speed tolerance

[mossy1200]

Since you're seem to do the most whining about 'speed scam' on this thread tell us all how many tickets have you had for breaking the speed limit? 5? 10? 20? more?

'Cos it must have been a shitload to keep you whining on for so long, like frikkin squadron of giant mosquitos....sheesh!

And how many 'other' tickets have you had?

For me its no longer about the tickets because I don't get them its the forken 70-80kph drivers and the publics fear of passing that's upsetting me now.

[haydes55]

Since you're seem to do the most whining about 'speed scam' on this thread tell us all how many tickets have you had for breaking the speed limit? 5? 10? 20? more?

'Cos it must have been a shitload to keep you whining on for so long, like frikkin squadron of giant mosquitos....sheesh!

And how many 'other' tickets have you had?

I think the reason most people (myself definitely included) complain about these laws/enforcement, is due to the fact that we don't want to be criminalised for no justifiable reason.

Mainly, I really don't want to do a runner from the cops. But why would I stop and take such a severe punishment, for being a safer road user than the majority of brain dead morons that manage to get ahold of licenses? Especially when my bike can easily outrun police?

Most people don't want to lose their licence, their job and their hard earned money. On the other hand, I don't want to lose my enjoyment in life, so like most people, we don't want to sit in the upright position and gently roll from location to location. The speed limit is ludicrously low for modern vehicles capabilities, in the hands of a half decent rider/driver. Physics don't change, just because we are in NZ, physics is a law which is impossible to break. The only saving grace to the argument that speed kills, is the faster you go, the bigger the mess.... Which is proven wrong by the fact that every single country with higher speed limits than NZ has lower road toll per capita.... Due to drivers paying more attention to the road, meaning less crashes. Less fatalities, and less injuries. There were apparently 12,000 injuries resulting from road collisions last year. Imagine if the speed limit was raised, and NZ wasn't some magical anomaly from the rest of the worlds statistics and studies. Less Collisions, resulting in fewer total injuries on our roads, so maybe only 6,000 injuries in a year. You can't cure stupid, but you can let them cull themselves out of the gene pool, so presume the same idiots would die every year (even though evidence suggests fewer people would die), so 300 deaths. Would a sever drop in injuries not be enough of a reason to increase speed limits?

Logic for speed limit increases reducing total number of crashes, thus injuries resulting from: If the faster we go, the greater the risk of injury/death, then countries with speed limits over 50% higher than ours having lower death rates must have less accidents. Presuming the majority of crashes at "dangerous speeds" result in injuries or deaths at a higher rate than in NZ.

[speedpro]

I'd like to see fully "independent" analysis of crash statistics, and driving in general for that matter. Of course the data collection would have to be "independent" as well. No point analysing skewed data. If that was possible I would expect the information could be used to formulate some worthwhile policy, such as but not limited to tougher driving tests. The politicians of course would select the experts to perform the "independent" analysis and the terms of reference would be worded such that the only possible outcome of the independent analysis would be that "speed kills" and gosh isn't the government doing a wonderful job.
I have serious trouble with the stats and their analysis that are provided. It could be that I'm wrong about speed (not) being the big demon but I've seen nothing I would consider reliable to back up the assertion.

I must be getting old, I find myself nodding in agreement with Winston again. Had to laugh that the Police hierarchy got all offended saying he was trying to make political gain from the road toll. Really? Winston? Of course they were going to express offence, their policy of strict enforcement has been a complete failure. We should be offended that so many of us have died unnecessarily whilst the Police are checking for drivers going 1Km/h over the limit.

[R650R]

Sure your not down south mate...:mellow::laugh:

You lucky bastard, proper tickets like that are collectors items these days. That will be worth money in years to come unlike those shitty supermarket dockets they print in those new patrol cars... :(

[AllanB]

To be fair each police person does have a degree of leeway when pulling someone over - it can be a reminder chat or a ticket. Best to be suitably apologetic, whinging and moaning at them will surely have them reaching for their pen and then conducting a timely inspection of paperwork and the condition of your vehicle.

[Kickaha]

for being a safer road user than the majority of brain dead morons that manage to get ahold of licenses?.

All those brain dead morons probaby think they're safer road users than the majority as well

If everyone was as safe a road user as all the KB keyboard warriors we'd have a zero road toll:msn-wink:

[AllanB]

If everyone was as safe a road user as all the KB keyboard warriors we'd have a zero road toll:msn-wink:

HAha - I'd imagine if we held a KB members NZ ride we'd manage to at least increase the ACC levies on our rego.

[rastuscat]

You lucky bastard, proper tickets like that are collectors items these days. That will be worth money in years to come unlike those shitty supermarket dockets they print in those new patrol cars... :(

I can help with an old style version if you want a personalized one.......

[haydes55]

All those brain dead morons probaby think they're safer road users than the majority as well

If everyone was as safe a road user as all the KB keyboard warriors we'd have a zero road toll:msn-wink:


Do you ever look at accidents and wonder "how fucking dense did you have to be to crash there?". Almost every single time. I work with several people who drive company vehicles as well, almost everyone else has had at least one crash, one workmate has written off one van and had 2 other big crashes, another has had a serious crash in the ute, one guy managed to have 3 crashes before his 90 day trial was finished.... He's still working for us to make sure he pays for the damages. 3 years into driving and still the only damage I've caused to the van in 160,000km is a broken aerial, and a scratch on the side from squeezing through a gap I shouldn't have. 5000 customers driveways and only one driveway fuck up.

It's not hard to not fuck up.

[Big Dog]

I think the reason most people (myself definitely included) complain about these laws/enforcement, is due to the fact that we don't want to be criminalised for no justifiable reason.

Mainly, I really don't want to do a runner from the cops. But why would I stop and take such a severe punishment, for being a safer road user than the majority of brain dead morons that manage to get ahold of licenses? Especially when my bike can easily outrun police?

Most people don't want to lose their licence, their job and their hard earned money. On the other hand, I don't want to lose my enjoyment in life, so like most people, we don't want to sit in the upright position and gently roll from location to location. The speed limit is ludicrously low for modern vehicles capabilities, in the hands of a half decent rider/driver. Physics don't change, just because we are in NZ, physics is a law which is impossible to break. The only saving grace to the argument that speed kills, is the faster you go, the bigger the mess.... Which is proven wrong by the fact that every single country with higher speed limits than NZ has lower road toll per capita.... Due to drivers paying more attention to the road, meaning less crashes. Less fatalities, and less injuries. There were apparently 12,000 injuries resulting from road collisions last year. Imagine if the speed limit was raised, and NZ wasn't some magical anomaly from the rest of the worlds statistics and studies. Less Collisions, resulting in fewer total injuries on our roads, so maybe only 6,000 injuries in a year. You can't cure stupid, but you can let them cull themselves out of the gene pool, so presume the same idiots would die every year (even though evidence suggests fewer people would die), so 300 deaths. Would a sever drop in injuries not be enough of a reason to increase speed limits?

Logic for speed limit increases reducing total number of crashes, thus injuries resulting from: If the faster we go, the greater the risk of injury/death, then countries with speed limits over 50% higher than ours having lower death rates must have less accidents. Presuming the majority of crashes at "dangerous speeds" result in injuries or deaths at a higher rate than in NZ.
Speeding is not a criminal offence.
What makes you so special? How is the "brain dead moron to identify you from normal drivers?

Don't get me wrong I think our national speed limit is too low, I do think if you wish to advance an argument for the raising of the limit flagrant misunderstanding of the system compounded by a statement of intent to be have in a criminal manner ( by doing a runner from the Police ) you need to be aware that you are actually undermining your position by reinforcing the the negative stereotype of persons able to drive at 150.

The work colleague you mention in another post, how would his accidents have ended had they begun 50 k faster?




Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[Big Dog]

Heading south on the Sporty, middle of lane, just before Sanson en route to P Nth... when a 'plainclothes' (?Japanese) police car (grey s/w) pulled out of the northbound queue w/all lights flashing - northbound just outside the Sanson 50k zone and using up half of what I'd previously regarded as 'my' lane. Last seen going north at a high rate of knots... Have to wonder if he/she even saw a rider in the oncoming lane...
So unimpressed when cops drop the u turn in front of me, it has happened 2 or 3 times on a bike once In a 4wd,,
Correct me if I am wrong disco lights mean give way or otherwise make room, stop if they are behind you?
Surprising coincidence, all had the lights on but no noisemaker and no indicators.



Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[RDJ]

So unimpressed when cops drop the u turn in front of me, it has happened 2 or 3 times on a bike once In a 4wd,,
Correct me if I am wrong disco lights mean give way or otherwise make room, stop if they are behind you?
Surprising coincidence, all had the lights on but no noisemaker and no indicators.



Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

Correct - lights only, no siren, and heading towards me. Where the road has already narrowed coming north out of Sanson. No doubt the cars in front of them were not pulling over fast enough but there is nowhere to pull over on that short stretch, until it opens into two lanes a klick or so further on.

Interestingly, a different (marked) police car was behind me Bulls to Turakina. Then on the 2-lane overtaking stretch up Turakina hill it rolled by me at 105+ km/hr... I was doing just the 100 for obvious reasons. Overtaking at 105 it didn't suddenly hit anything or veer off the road despite what we're told is an incredibly risky speed/maneuver... Then a few klicks later it did a U-turn to take off after a speeder. And yes - we're all paying attention now every time a police car breaks the limit even when overtaking in an overtaking lane / does a U-turn in the face of oncoming traffic... because that's what the police ticket us for.

[R650R]

I can help with an old style version if you want a personalized one.......

It would blow out the eventual resale profit if I have to travel all the way to the south island for it. Ferry costs, hotel costs, flight home after impound etc.... ;)

I've only had one ticket in last ten years (Truck 12k over) and plan on keeping it that way as new employer of high repute requires clean licence... actually more of a motivator than any ad campaign or penalties.
Before that 1 bike ticket by mufti and one camera ticket truck.... and one friendly warning for 116k in wet back in the old days of relaxed enforcement.

On a side note my interactions with the ground, other vehicles and roadside furniture outweighs tickets issued.... guess us humans will be silly regardless of what happens from time to time.

[AllanB]

On U turns - I see more civilians doing stupid u-turns weekly than cops. It does not make headlines when Joe Blogs does a u-turn and wrecks someones vehicle, body, life - it does it a copper makes the same error in judgement.

[RDJ]

On U turns - I see more civilians doing stupid u-turns weekly than cops. It does not make headlines when Joe Blogs does a u-turn and wrecks someones vehicle, body, life - it does it a copper makes the same error in judgement.

Police are given an enormous amount of direct, court-enforced power over (in this context) the travelling public. So they are not supposed to make the same errors in judgement. When you allow a surgeon to cut into your belly to excise cancer, you don't expect the surgeon to exercise the same judgement as a layperson.

We also still don't see any justification of the concept that whenever the road toll goes down the police brass claim credit for that result, but when it rises as a result of their zero-tolerance speed enforcement (so no one dares overtake and spends most of their drive looking at the speedometer), that result is completely divorced from Mr Cliff's enforcement policy?

[R650R]

Police are given an enormous amount of direct, court-enforced power over (in this context) the travelling public. So they are not supposed to make the same errors in judgement. When you allow a surgeon to cut into your belly to excise cancer, you don't expect the surgeon to exercise the same judgement as a layperson.

We also still don't see any justification of the concept that whenever the road toll goes down the police brass claim credit for that result, but when it rises as a result of their zero-tolerance speed enforcement (so no one dares overtake and spends most of their drive looking at the speedometer), that result is completely divorced from Mr Cliff's enforcement policy?

Actually Police have SWFA power hence why criminals get away scot free so often....

So what your really trying to say is cops should have much better driving standards than us but be expected to be lenient to us found driving to much lesser standard....

A bad analogy btw, you realise how many people are harmed or killed by medical malpractice, way more than u-turning cops cars.....

[RDJ]

Actually Police have SWFA power hence why criminals get away scot free so often....

So what your really trying to say is cops should have much better driving standards than us but be expected to be lenient to us found driving to much lesser standard....

A bad analogy btw, you realise how many people are harmed or killed by medical malpractice, way more than u-turning cops cars.....

Incorrect. What I said was that police should be demonstrating the safest driving standards precisely because they are the enforcers of safe driving.

In terms of medical malpractice we can agree to differ about the applicability of the analogy. I would point out however that medical malpractice is frequently seriously disciplined by the medical profession.

[R650R]

***Breaking News*** ***Breaking News*** ***Breaking News*** ***Breaking News*** ***Breaking News***

07 January 2015 2.29pm

New technology available to enforcement agencies means the new no tolerance scheme will now be extended to tyre tread. Previously a matchhead was used as a general gauge of if there was 1.5mm of tread remaining and officers using their discretion in marginal measurements.
But thanks to a Chinese supplier Wotuspinfor Happyplus new finely calibrated digital gauges Police will now be able to fine when the tread depth is 1.49mm. The new eco friendly solar powered gauges are accurate to within 0.0001mm and were used when aligning concrete blocks on the Three Gorges dam project. These super accuracy mostly tools are what the Chinese credit with the dams tolerances being better thena the Egyptian pyramids.
Dogs and Leppers guide author Clive Lambchops-Wilson-Fancyfucking-name says the new tolerance will cause crashes as motorists will constantly be looking out the window at their tyre treads instead of concentrating on driving. He and other critics have branded the exercise as revenue gathering. Already a pilot project using the new digital speed cameras is already issuing infringmenets for tyre defects spotted.
Staff at Columbian Necktie Retreads say they are bracing themselves for an influx of customers under the new tougher levels.

Image coutesy of Wotuspinfor China.

307704

[BlackSheepLogic]

Interestingly, a different (marked) police car was behind me Bulls to Turakina. Then on the 2-lane overtaking stretch up Turakina hill it rolled by me at 105+ km/hr... I was doing just the 100 for obvious reasons. Overtaking at 105 it didn't suddenly hit anything or veer off the road despite what we're told is an incredibly risky speed/maneuver... Then a few klicks later it did a U-turn to take off after a speeder. And yes - we're all paying attention now every time a police car breaks the limit even when overtaking in an overtaking lane / does a U-turn in the face of oncoming traffic... because that's what the police ticket us for.

What gold standard did you check and calibrate your speedometer with and how much did it cost to do so? 7% error (optimistic) is quite typical for a car/bike speedometer.

[haydes55]

I saw about 7 cops today.

Decided at 11am to make a run for the cape. Packed up the tent, some undies and togs and jumped on my bike (running mint now with fresh oil/filter, electrical gremlin has been squashed and cables and levers all lubed and adjusted).

I'm in kerikeri at the moment. I caught up to another young guy who was riding a gsxr1000. He had a radar detector, so we cruised together from just past the toll road, to kerikeri where I turned off exhausted. A cop started following us after whangarei. Trying to stay at 100km/h is hard work. I'd rather not look at my speedo that long.

In future I think I'll just pull over and let police past me. Easier to follow them than to let them follow me. Don't ask me what the roads or scenery was like in the last half hour, fuck knows, all I know is my speedo is pretty to look at non stop.

[RDJ]

What gold standard did you check and calibrate your speedometer with and how much did it cost to do so? 7% error (optimistic) is quite typical for a car/bike speedometer.

No additional cost - already own 2 Garmin Zumos, 1x 450, 1x 550. I believe GPS speeds are as accurate as it gets for the likes of us.

[RDJ]

Actually Police have SWFA power hence why criminals get away scot free so often....

So what your really trying to say is cops should have much better driving standards than us but be expected to be lenient to us found driving to much lesser standard....

A bad analogy btw, you realise how many people are harmed or killed by medical malpractice, way more than u-turning cops cars.....

...and while we're judging analogies, recall that you give consent to a doctor / surgeon to operate / treat you. And you can withdraw that at any time while you're still conscious pre-anesthetic. Police 'operate' on you without consultation, consent or warning.

[R650R]

...and while we're judging analogies, recall that you give consent to a doctor / surgeon to operate / treat you. And you can withdraw that at any time while you're still conscious pre-anesthetic. Police 'operate' on you without consultation, consent or warning.

Errrr No. You become their bitch when you sign for your drivers license, its all in the fine print there that you accept to bend over and take all that is directed by the state and its agents...
If you want to know more on this complex area of commercial law and the sale of your person to the state vis your birth certificate then you'll have to book a seminar with Axzle...

[Conquiztador]

Sorry, did not read all of it. But I think I got the idea...

There is millions and more millions NZ$'s spent on "The Road Toll Must Come Down". Lower tolerances for breaking the speed limit, lower alcohol limits, more police on the roads, $$'s spent on modern radars to catch the speeders, etc. And then the death toll goes up... In any other job head would roll. You have installed new rules and regulations to achieve your objective, you have spent money. But you have failed... So what do they do? Yep, police even more and punish the slightest overstepping of the laws. That seems to be the answer to it all: Punishment!

But punishment does not work. It creates resentment and anger. Punishment as a teaching technique does not work. Not with animals (have you ever been to a dog training?), not with children (it is today totally removed from our schools as punishment does not work to teach) and not with adults (I have never ever seen punishment used as a technique in any training programmes). But our police insists that it is the way to go. So they keep on punishing us for very small mistakes/oversteps. And when they fail in their job their answer is to punish us even more.

So, if the saving of lives is really the objective here (I do doubt it...) then why are we spending such a huge amount of funds to get the road toll below the current 350/year (approx only)? Suicide prevention does not even get 10% of the amount that is spent on the Road Toll prevention. We have 500/year suicides in NZ (approx only). Would it not make sense to spend more funds on suicide prevention to bring those numbers down?

But then again... giving people who attempt suicides a fine might not work. And as that is clearly the preferred option to solve all problems perhaps we need some new options??

Note that I am not attacking the officers doing the job. They have been told what to do and they must obey. I have a problem with the ones pulling the strings. The ones using the Road Toll as a way to prove that they are doing their job. And I can se why: It is easy to measure, Police can be seen "doing their job", it is propaganda. When the accepted answer is "more punishment" nobody needs to do any thinking.

Personally I don't think the real answer is that hard to come up with. Simple in fact: Get more vehicles off our roads! Provide awsum public transport, cheap air tickets, use railways for transporting all the big stuff like containers, timber etc. But what is happening? Railways are scrapped, more freight trucks are coming on to the roads (we are currently short of qualified truck drivers...).

Time to get people at the top with brains and passion for our country.

[haydes55]

Sorry, did not read all of it. But I think I got the idea...

There is millions and more millions NZ$'s spent on "The Road Toll Must Come Down". Lower tolerances for breaking the speed limit, lower alcohol limits, more police on the roads, $$'s spent on modern radars to catch the speeders, etc. And then the death toll goes up... In any other job head would roll. You have installed new rules and regulations to achieve your objective, you have spent money. But you have failed... So what do they do? Yep, police even more and punish the slightest overstepping of the laws. That seems to be the answer to it all: Punishment!

But punishment does not work. It creates resentment and anger. Punishment as a teaching technique does not work. Not with animals (have you ever been to a dog training?), not with children (it is today totally removed from our schools as punishment does not work to teach) and not with adults (I have never ever seen punishment used as a technique in any training programmes). But our police insists that it is the way to go. So they keep on punishing us for very small mistakes/oversteps. And when they fail in their job their answer is to punish us even more.

So, if the saving of lives is really the objective here (I do doubt it...) then why are we spending such a huge amount of funds to get the road toll below the current 350/year (approx only)? Suicide prevention does not even get 10% of the amount that is spent on the Road Toll prevention. We have 500/year suicides in NZ (approx only). Would it not make sense to spend more funds on suicide prevention to bring those numbers down?

But then again... giving people who attempt suicides a fine might not work. And as that is clearly the preferred option to solve all problems perhaps we need some new options??

Note that I am not attacking the officers doing the job. They have been told what to do and they must obey. I have a problem with the ones pulling the strings. The ones using the Road Toll as a way to prove that they are doing their job. And I can se why: It is easy to measure, Police can be seen "doing their job", it is propaganda. When the accepted answer is "more punishment" nobody needs to do any thinking.

Personally I don't think the real answer is that hard to come up with. Simple in fact: Get more vehicles off our roads! Provide awsum public transport, cheap air tickets, use railways for transporting all the big stuff like containers, timber etc. But what is happening? Railways are scrapped, more freight trucks are coming on to the roads (we are currently short of qualified truck drivers...).

Time to get people at the top with brains and passion for our country.


You win the thread.

[R650R]

Suicide prevention does not even get 10% of the amount that is spent on the Road Toll prevention. We have 500/year suicides in NZ (approx only). Would it not make sense to spend more funds on suicide prevention to bring those numbers down?

Railways are scrapped, more freight trucks are coming on to the roads (we are currently short of qualified truck drivers...).

Time to get people at the top with brains and passion for our country.

Yes that's the real elephant in the room and getting worse. And for those 500 that 'succeeded' there must be at least ten times as many who tried or threatened too via friends or social media resulting in a 111 call. So that's 5000 people a year at least tying up priority one police resources and ambo. Its a terrible waste alright and hopefully some genius comes up with a decent programme. Then they'd be at least 20,000 man hours of policing to add to road safety instead...

I fail to see the analogy between speed tolerance and rail freight vs trucks. If anything its proven how cost and time effective trucking is. And btw Truckies have been subject to the 4k tolerance for the last ten years and I don't think any of them ran of the road staring at their speedos....
If anything its just reinforced how cost and time effective road is over rail for 90% of goods moved in NZ. 10-15 years ago enforcement was lax and it was quite normal to be rocking along at 110-115k on the likes of SH27 and you might just get a friendly warning flash of the lights and their was no *555 for joe blow to play at being mall cop.
Now every car behind you is effectively a policeman and the cops themselves have gotten stricter.
Maybe a trucks vs trains thread so people can understand the facts.
There is no shortage of truck drivers if you are a reputable employer, I've just changed and their was a que to get in the door...

Brains and passion yes. Someone needs to start a movement that our policitcians must have had real jobs in the relevant field for ten years before entering parliament. Eg the minister of health must have been a doctor/surgeon, minister of police must have been a real cop, justice minister must be someone whos worked in victim support etc. No fancy ideologists like Helen clark and no big money gamblers from the stock amrkey like Keys.

[TheDemonLord]

Sorry, did not read all of it. But I think I got the idea...

There is millions and more millions NZ$'s spent on "The Road Toll Must Come Down". Lower tolerances for breaking the speed limit, lower alcohol limits, more police on the roads, $$'s spent on modern radars to catch the speeders, etc. And then the death toll goes up... In any other job head would roll. You have installed new rules and regulations to achieve your objective, you have spent money. But you have failed... So what do they do? Yep, police even more and punish the slightest overstepping of the laws. That seems to be the answer to it all: Punishment!

But punishment does not work. It creates resentment and anger. Punishment as a teaching technique does not work. Not with animals (have you ever been to a dog training?), not with children (it is today totally removed from our schools as punishment does not work to teach) and not with adults (I have never ever seen punishment used as a technique in any training programmes). But our police insists that it is the way to go. So they keep on punishing us for very small mistakes/oversteps. And when they fail in their job their answer is to punish us even more.

So, if the saving of lives is really the objective here (I do doubt it...) then why are we spending such a huge amount of funds to get the road toll below the current 350/year (approx only)? Suicide prevention does not even get 10% of the amount that is spent on the Road Toll prevention. We have 500/year suicides in NZ (approx only). Would it not make sense to spend more funds on suicide prevention to bring those numbers down?

But then again... giving people who attempt suicides a fine might not work. And as that is clearly the preferred option to solve all problems perhaps we need some new options??

Note that I am not attacking the officers doing the job. They have been told what to do and they must obey. I have a problem with the ones pulling the strings. The ones using the Road Toll as a way to prove that they are doing their job. And I can se why: It is easy to measure, Police can be seen "doing their job", it is propaganda. When the accepted answer is "more punishment" nobody needs to do any thinking.

Personally I don't think the real answer is that hard to come up with. Simple in fact: Get more vehicles off our roads! Provide awsum public transport, cheap air tickets, use railways for transporting all the big stuff like containers, timber etc. But what is happening? Railways are scrapped, more freight trucks are coming on to the roads (we are currently short of qualified truck drivers...).

Time to get people at the top with brains and passion for our country.


What is this Crazy, logical, well thought out stuff doing on KB?!?

[Conquiztador]

Yes that's the real elephant in the room and getting worse. And for those 500 that 'succeeded' there must be at least ten times as many who tried or threatened too via friends or social media resulting in a 111 call. So that's 5000 people a year at least tying up priority one police resources and ambo. Its a terrible waste alright and hopefully some genius comes up with a decent programme. Then they'd be at least 20,000 man hours of policing to add to road safety instead...

I fail to see the analogy between speed tolerance and rail freight vs trucks. If anything its proven how cost and time effective trucking is. And btw Truckies have been subject to the 4k tolerance for the last ten years and I don't think any of them ran of the road staring at their speedos....
If anything its just reinforced how cost and time effective road is over rail for 90% of goods moved in NZ. 10-15 years ago enforcement was lax and it was quite normal to be rocking along at 110-115k on the likes of SH27 and you might just get a friendly warning flash of the lights and their was no *555 for joe blow to play at being mall cop.
Now every car behind you is effectively a policeman and the cops themselves have gotten stricter.
Maybe a trucks vs trains thread so people can understand the facts.
There is no shortage of truck drivers if you are a reputable employer, I've just changed and their was a que to get in the door...

Brains and passion yes. Someone needs to start a movement that our policitcians must have had real jobs in the relevant field for ten years before entering parliament. Eg the minister of health must have been a doctor/surgeon, minister of police must have been a real cop, justice minister must be someone whos worked in victim support etc. No fancy ideologists like Helen clark and no big money gamblers from the stock amrkey like Keys.

Re suicides: Provide easily accessable councelling. One big group are farmers. Males who are expected to be strong and have all the answers. To work in isolation and keep the country running. The ones who have managed to get help before 'succeeding' to kill them selves have similar stories: Finacial struggles, banks and insurance hassles, relationships taking a hit. They are not males who admit that they are not coping. Give them easily accessable professional help. Another group is people who have diagnosed mental illness. Currently the solution is to close local facilities that provide a 'safe haven', facilities where the staff knows them. They have to travel to main centres to get help. We are talking about people who struggle to get up in the morning, who struggle with new people, who struggle to take their medicin and suddenly they are supposed to travel to get help....

Re trucks: I get stuck behind more trucks on roads today than ever before. They are damaging the roads, causing drivers to take risks to pass and yes, also make us speed to pass them. But my point was more re the decisions made at the top: If road safety was the top priority then why not make more trucks disappear and use the rail? One reason I don't believe that the main reason behind all this is to save lives but to run every part of our country like a business. It is cheaper to close railways and get private companies to transport stuff on the road. That, in my opinion, does not equate to saving lives on the road.

[BlackSheepLogic]

Yes, I get caught behind trucks, BUT they pull to the left at pretty much any opportunity, even at times slowing down to let traffic behind them pass. They don't tailgate me, don't cut me off, they don't speed up to make sure I can't pass them, don't run though roundabouts when I'm i'm them, indicate when appropriate, don't suddenly stand on there brakes mid corner, keep to there side of the road etc..... I don't mind sharing the road with truckers working to feed their families because they easy to follow and on the whole really courteous.

There are a few drivers and I noticed more than usual over the holiday period this year who seemed to be intentionally holding up traffic at there righteous speed (sometimes as low as 80Km/h) according to there inaccurate speedometer , drivers who blocked the passing lane (sometimes at such a slow differential in speed that they failed to pass), camper vans that made no effort to let traffic pass them, and drivers which stood on there brakes at every minor bend in the road especially bad mid-corner.

I have no problem sharing the road with slower or faster road users who are courteous and well behaved. The majority by far I find are this way. But it only takes a few to cause havoc on the road - the righteous in particular excel in creating problems on the road because there uncourteous behavior extends far beyond just obstructing traffic flow.

I would like to see more of the safety messaging & enforcement related to speed spent instead on uncourteous & obstructive driving. I don't believe the majority of bad behavior on the road is skill related. I think a lot of it poor attitude, aggressive personalities, and righteous entitlement. Although the percentage of drivers in these categories is small their behavior effects a lot of road users.



Re trucks: I get stuck behind more trucks on roads today than ever before. They are damaging the roads, causing drivers to take risks to pass and yes, also make us speed to pass them. But my opint was more re the decisions made at the top: If road safety was the top priority then why not make more trucks disappear and use the rail? One reason I don't believe that the main reason behind all this is to save lives but to run every part of our country like a business. It is cheaper to close railways and get private companies to transport stuff on the road. That, in my opinion, does not equate to saving lives on the road.

[Conquiztador]

Yes, I get caught behind trucks, BUT they pull to the left at pretty much any opportunity, even at times slowing down to let traffic behind them pass. They don't tailgate me, don't cut me off, they don't speed up to make sure I can't pass them, don't run though roundabouts when I'm i'm them, indicate when appropriate, don't suddenly stand on there brakes mid corner, keep to there side of the road etc..... I don't mind sharing the road with truckers working to feed their families because they easy to follow and on the whole really courteous.





I do not have a problem with truck drivers. I have a problem with decision makers who decide that saving money by scrapping railways and making privateers in charge of transporting all goods is a stroke of brilliance. I have a problem with decisios that make us use our private vehicles to get anywhere, I have a problem with cramming more vehicles on to the roads, I have a problem with making all decisions for this country based on dollars. I have a problem with cost cutting and making the ones on the fringes of our society have to fend for them self, I have a problem with the answer to all this being punishment of the individuals, I have a problem with the lack of any real big picture strategy where all is considered, I have a problem with making the ones who have to perform the tasks the bad guys. And I have a huge problem with punishment being used to solve it all. Did just resently read about a farmer family who got a $20K fine for not having helmets on when usig their 4W bikes. It was the 4'th time they got caught making this horrendeous crime. That is $20K that should have been used to feed the animals, send kids to school, fix that old tractor etc. Did anyone think about giving them education/training/incentives to make them use helmets? Or was it, once again, make them obey the masters by punishment??

[unstuck]

I do not have a problem with truck drivers. I have a problem with decision makers who decide that saving money by scrapping railways and making privateers in charge of transporting all goods is a stroke of brilliance. I have a problem with making all decisions for this country based on dollars. I have a problem with cost cutting and making the ones on the fringes of our society have to fend for them self, I have a problem with the answer to all this being punishment of the individuals, I have a problem with the lack of any real big picture strategy where all is considered, I have a problem with making the ones who have to perform the tasks the bad guys. And I have a huge problem with punishment being used to solve it all. Did just resently read about a farmer family who got a $20K fine for not having helmets on when usig their 4W bikes. It was the 4'th time they got caught making this horrendeous crime. That is $20K that should have been used to feed the animals, send kids to school, fix that old tractor etc. Did anyone think about giving them education/training/incentives to make them use helmets? Or was it, once again, make them obey the masters by punishment??

Was $20 grand each for both the farmer and his wife.= $40g :niceone:

[Conquiztador]

Was $20 grand each for both the farmer and his wife.= $40g :niceone:

Somebody slipped up... Why did they not add $20K for the kids, the dog, a few pigs and that noisy chook?:Police:

[unstuck]

Somebody slipped up... Why did they not add $20K for the kids, the dog, a few pigs and that noisy chook?:Police:

Must be a great job hiding in the bushes spying on farmers. Wonder how you get on to that lark.:niceone:

[Big Dog]

Re suicides: Provide easily accessable councelling. One big group are farmers. Males who are expected to be strong and have all the answers. To work in isolation and keep the country running. The ones who have managed to get help before 'succeeding' to kill them selves have similar stories: Finacial struggles, banks and insurance hassles, relationships taking a hit. They are not males who admit that they are not coping. Give them easily accessable professional help. Another group is people who have diagnosed mental illness. Currently the solution is to close local facilities that provide a 'safe haven', facilities where the staff knows them. They have to travel to main centres to get help. We are talking about people who struggle to get up in the morning, who struggle with new people, who struggle to take their medicin and suddenly they are supposed to travel to get help....

Re trucks: I get stuck behind more trucks on roads today than ever before. They are damaging the roads, causing drivers to take risks to pass and yes, also make us speed to pass them. But my point was more re the decisions made at the top: If road safety was the top priority then why not make more trucks disappear and use the rail? One reason I don't believe that the main reason behind all this is to save lives but to run every part of our country like a business. It is cheaper to close railways and get private companies to transport stuff on the road. That, in my opinion, does not equate to saving lives on the road.

Oh and if you do get diagnosed with a lifelong condition that causes your depression and need help you get 6 visits to a pro. Or 10 if you pay $100 per visit.

I guess that is up on the 2 visits I was offered 20 years ago.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[Big Dog]

Must be a great job hiding in the bushes spying on farmers. Wonder how you get on to that lark.:niceone:

It is rarely a good idea to make a career out of your hobby.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[willytheekid]

It is rarely a good idea to make a career out of your hobby.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

:laugh:...hes got ya there unstuck

[unstuck]

:laugh:...hes got ya there unstuck

Yep, cant argue with that.:laugh::laugh:

[R650R]

Re trucks: I get stuck behind more trucks on roads today than ever before. They are damaging the roads, causing drivers to take risks to pass and yes, also make us speed to pass them. But my point was more re the decisions made at the top: If road safety was the top priority then why not make more trucks disappear and use the rail? One reason I don't believe that the main reason behind all this is to save lives but to run every part of our country like a business. It is cheaper to close railways and get private companies to transport stuff on the road. That, in my opinion, does not equate to saving lives on the road.

There is no conspiracy behind trucks getting preffered over rail, its simple economic factors. I agree it was a bad decision by Labour to privatise and sell off the rail originally, blowing away 18,000 jobs in the process. That kick started the crime problems and welfare dependency in this country. It would have been much better to keep paying people to do their jobs even if they were making a loss.
But it would have made little difference to the trucks on our roads today.
A lot of trucks are basically 'couriers' on our open highways even if not signwritten as DHL or postehaste etc.... There is so much stuff these days that is made/picked/packed/imported at the last minute these days and the customer NEEDS it tomorrow. The cut off, turnaround times and double handling means Rail couldn't take over modern freight even if it was mandated to.
And there isn't the land available these days for the railheads/shunting yards/sorting depo to make it work. Our former Railyards now have a PaknSave there....
A lot of the big trucks direct deliver their stuff to supermarkets/factories while your asleep. If it all came by rail there would be a tidal wave of metro trucks running around the city causing havoc. That and all the extra delays at the barrier arms (most cities with rail seem to be cut in half by it) would be worse than an occasional delay on open road.

As for damaging the roads, there have been some major improvements and widening of shoulders etc lately thanks to pressure from truck and cycle lobby groups. I bet some of this has already saved various car and biker lives without them realise when they've nodded off or had to swerve etc....

[FJRider]

Re trucks: I get stuck behind more trucks on roads today than ever before. They are damaging the roads, causing drivers to take risks to pass and yes, also make us speed to pass them. But my point was more re the decisions made at the top: If road safety was the top priority then why not make more trucks disappear and use the rail? One reason I don't believe that the main reason behind all this is to save lives but to run every part of our country like a business. It is cheaper to close railways and get private companies to transport stuff on the road. That, in my opinion, does not equate to saving lives on the road.

Trucks on roads are a "Catch 22" .... They have benefits (to all citizens of NZ) .... but the downside is having them on YOUR roads ... <_<

Such is the way of life. Get used to it. It won't change anytime soon ...

If Motorcycles were required to pay registration/road kilometers to the same formula as trucks ... (Based on maximum laden weight the vehicle is allowed) motorcyclists would be begging to return to as it is now. As such ... truck owners pay their share into the Government slush fund for road repairs. The downside is ... Local Area Councils rarely spend anymore time/money on road repairs than they've budgeted for. To get more funding for such ... an increase in rates for ALL property owner SHOULD be implemented ... (50% increase at least) Problem solved/roads fixed.

Trucks won's "disappear" ... because people are impatient ... and want freight moved NOW. And want to receive it yesterday. Rail (is usually the cheaper option .... but .. ) won't (can't) make THAT happen. Ever ... as the overnight deliveries everyone wants ... WON'T/CAN'T be achieved by rail.


So they hire/pay for a TRUCK delivery. And quite happy to do so ... (then moan about the price/road damage anyway)


People care more about saving TIME ... than saving lives. (it's THEIR valuable TIME that's at ... "risk)" ..?? being lost.

[unstuck]

Trucks on roads are a "Catch 22" .... They have benefits (to all citizens of NZ) .... but the downside is having them on YOUR roads ... <_<

Such is the way of life. Get used to it. It won't change anytime soon ...

If Motorcycles were required to pay registration/road kilometers to the same formula as trucks ... (Based on maximum laden weight the vehicle is allowed) motorcyclists would be begging to return to as it is now. As such ... truck owners pay their share into the Government slush fund for road repairs. The downside is ... Local Area Councils rarely spend anymore time/money on road repairs than they've budgeted for. To get more funding for such ... an increase in rates for ALL property owner SHOULD be implemented ... (50% increase at least) Problem solved/roads fixed.

Trucks won's "disappear" ... because people are impatient ... and want freight moved NOW. And want to receive it yesterday. Rail (is usually the cheaper option .... but .. ) won't (can't) make THAT happen. Ever ... as the overnight deliveries everyone wants ... WON'T/CAN'T be achieved by rail.


So they hire/pay for a TRUCK delivery. And quite happy to do so ... (then moan about the price/road damage anyway)




People care more about saving TIME ... than saving lives. (it's THEIR valuable TIME that's at ... "risk)" ..?? being lost.


Fucking milk tankers, if I buy a cow, can I moan about milk tankers more? :bleh:

[FJRider]

Fucking milk tankers, if I buy a cow, can I moan about milk tankers more? :bleh:

You CAN ... :yes:


But the downside is .... us lazy impatient bastards that have no place to keep a cow .... DON'T CARE/Won't listen ... about/to whinging pricks that do ... :shifty:

[Berries]

Must be a great job hiding in the bushes spying on farmers. Wonder how you get on to that lark.:niceone:
For me it was due to an exclusion order banning me from being within 500m of a primary school for doing the same thing.
:innocent:


Oh and if you do get diagnosed with a lifelong condition that causes your depression and need help you get 6 visits to a pro.
Does marriage count? I could do with a pro...........

[Berries]

And now people who admit to setting their cruise control above the speed limit and indicating for 200m are getting uppity when they are overtaken in a passing lane.

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?

footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral (http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/64822052/footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral)

[Ocean1]

And now people who admit to setting their cruise control above the speed limit and indicating for 200m are getting uppity when they are overtaken in a passing lane.

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?

footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral (http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/64822052/footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral)

I just watched that and thought the same thing. Looked to me like the bus was past him before the lanes merged.

Close, I must admit, but in my opinion he's the one that should have taken action to avoid any close call in that situation, just get off the gas for 5 seconds. In fact he's the one legally required to give way in that situation.

[swbarnett]

And now people who admit to setting their cruise control above the speed limit and indicating for 200m are getting uppity when they are overtaken in a passing lane.

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?

footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral (http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/64822052/footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral)
Looks like the video's been pulled.

[scumdog]

Looks like the video's been pulled.
It's still on Stuff...

[TheDemonLord]

Looks like the video's been pulled.

Still there for me - Bus did an okay job, $10 says the guy in the car sped up to try and stop the bus overtaking

[swbarnett]

It's still on Stuff...
Weird! It's not on the page I went to: http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/64822052/footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral

Edit: Found it - Firefox is not behaving.

[unstuck]

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?



His wife is going to think the bus drivers penis is bigger than his. Fucker should have been aware of the bus coming, and slowed down accordingly

Good job his kids were distracted, FFS. Sensationalism
His wife was concerned, FFS. Sensationalism.


Boo hoo the big bus overtook my heap of shit explorer. Pass the bullets please..........

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/82h2hyM4DTM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>:devil2::devil2:

[Tazz]

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?

His loss of face at being passed by a bus.

If it doesn't get you there any slower (since passing is no faster) how about slowing a little to let the bus that you've been watching for 200m past at a distance to the end of the bay you're more comfortable with...

It always seems to be 'you're in my way, you've done this to me, I shouldn't have to slow for you' then a bitch about the position they find themselves in on the road as a result. Little courtesy can be good for you as well as those you're giving it to.

[swbarnett]

I just watched that and thought the same thing. Looked to me like the bus was past him before the lanes merged.

Close, I must admit, but in my opinion he's the one that should have taken action to avoid any close call in that situation, just get off the gas for 5 seconds. In fact he's the one legally required to give way in that situation.
Exactly. Small dick syndrome IMO - on the part of the car driver. Some people are just too damn precious.

[scumdog]

A video clip:devil2::devil2:


Kewl, bloody kewl, well worth the watch.:niceone:

[bogan]

:devil2::devil2:

Are they under camo to hide their shitty arse music?

[unstuck]

Are they under camo to hide their shitty arse music?

You would be the first to go precious.:love:

[roogazza]

doing 92kmh towing a boat ! I'd blow by every time ! :laugh:

[bogan]

You would be the first to go precious.:love:

Maaate, I went precious a long time back, just waiting to go platinum now :chase:

[Berries]

Weird! It's not on the page I went to.....
I imagine it would get removed quite quickly if they allowed comments.


Intercity failed to respond to numerous messages left by The Timaru Herald.
No wonder. I am just thankful that his children didn't witness it.

[Gremlin]

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?

footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral (http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/64822052/footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral)
It's obvious. He was suprised when a massive bus painted in horrible green suddenly appeared... I'd be worried about my eye sight and observation too :confused:

[mossy1200]

I have a problem with a driver that has cruse control set 92 and doesn't let traffic past in a passing lane.
He should have been slowing down to let a vehicle that would struggle to get past without a passing lane.

Starting to think zero tolerance is having a negative effect on road safety yet?
Slower drivers frustrating other drivers into taking risks?

[BigAl]

Still there for me - Bus did an okay job, $10 says the guy in the car sped up to try and stop the bus overtaking

+1, driver having a moan when he was in the wrong.

[swbarnett]

I imagine it would get removed quite quickly if they allowed comments.
Nah, it was there. My Firefox won't show it.

[_Shrek_]

And now people who admit to setting their cruise control above the speed limit and indicating for 200m are getting uppity when they are overtaken in a passing lane.

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?

footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral (http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/64822052/footage-of-bad-driving-goes-viral)

count the white line, the car speeds up as the bus is passing.... :bash: nothing wrong with the way he passed.... Ive been passed in the same spot towing a trailer, & most likely by the same bus/driver, coz he don't waste any time, nor does he hold any one up :laugh:

[swbarnett]

Can anyone tell me what this bloke is so worried about?
The trouble with cases like this is that even if it looks dodgy (which I don't think it does) the video only shows half the story. What we need is the bus's point of view as well.

[FJRider]

It's obvious. He was suprised when a massive bus painted in horrible green suddenly appeared... I'd be worried about my eye sight and observation too :confused:

Aren't the "Big green buses" governed to 90 km/hr .. ??

[Murray]

Aren't the "Big green buses" governed to 90 km/hr .. ??

Yep but maybe the cruise control (like my vehicle) is out by about 5 km's on the car with the trailor. Seen much much worse than this!!

[pete376403]

Yep but maybe the cruise control (like my vehicle) is out by about 5 km's on the car with the trailor. Seen much much worse than this!!

C/control attempts to maintain whatever speed you set it to. so if your speedo is reading 5- 8 slow, thats what you'll get. Maybe the bus's speed limiter is set more accurately.

[Scuba_Steve]

C/control attempts to maintain whatever speed you set it to. so if your speedo is reading 5- 8 slow, thats what you'll get. Maybe the bus's speed limiter is set more accurately.

But cruise control on alot of vehicles also runs on a +/- like air con, i.e. If cc is set to 100 it may let you drop to 90 or raise to 110. Fords tended to have the best cc for keeping you at the right speed, Toymotas won't slow you down when you go over your set speed (well at-least the highlanders we hired didn't) whereas da Ford would brake if you got 5km/h faster than set i.e down a hill

[mada]

Watched that video, fucking disgusting that intercity appear to have changed their colour theme.

That's the drivers gripe right?

[BlackSheepLogic]

But cruise control on alot of vehicles also runs on a +/- like air con, i.e. If cc is set to 100 it may let you drop to 90 or raise to 110. Fords tended to have the best cc for keeping you at the right speed, Toymotas won't slow you down when you go over your set speed (well at-least the highlanders we hired didn't) whereas da Ford would brake if you got 5km/h faster than set i.e down a hill

Speedometer in my wife's car is analogue but the cruise control speed set piont is digital. If cruise set point is 100km/h the analogue speedometer reads ~105km/h. Car electronics is making some allowance for the inbuilt inaccuracy in the analogue speedometer. GPS indicates 100km/h when the car's analogue speedometer reads little under 110km/h.

[husaberg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpJveCBanB4

[awa355]

Dont know if this has reared its ugly head before, but could be something for the future.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7803997.stm

[Berries]

Intelligent Speed Adaptation, or ISA, is something that is on the table here, just have a look at Safer Journeys. We are quite a few years behind some countries (that link was five years old) but it wouldn't take much to implement and would certainly take the pressure off the enforcement side of things.

Intelligent speed adaptation. (http://www.theaa.com/public_affairs/reports/intelligent-speed-adaptation.html)

Sucks big time though IMO. Might as well get a car..............

[swbarnett]

Intelligent Speed Adaptation, or ISA, is something that is on the table here, just have a look at Safer Journeys. We are quite a few years behind some countries (that link was five years old) but it wouldn't take much to implement and would certainly take the pressure off the enforcement side of things.

Intelligent speed adaptation. (http://www.theaa.com/public_affairs/reports/intelligent-speed-adaptation.html)

Sucks big time though IMO. Might as well get a car..............
My problem with mandatory speed adaptation is that there are times when breaking the speed limit is the only way to stay alive.

One of the more dramatic examples of this was when Mt. St. Helens erupted. Of two scientists on the mountain at the time the driver doing 100mph survived. The one one doing 70mph didn't. Both well above the posted speed limit.

I've had far less dramatic cases in the past where breaking to avoid an accident was not a good option and if I'd been restricted to 50kph I would've been hit.

[GrayWolf]

There is no conspiracy behind trucks getting preffered over rail, its simple economic factors. I agree it was a bad decision by Labour to privatise and sell off the rail originally, blowing away 18,000 jobs in the process. That kick started the crime problems and welfare dependency in this country. It would have been much better to keep paying people to do their jobs even if they were making a loss.
But it would have made little difference to the trucks on our roads today.
A lot of trucks are basically 'couriers' on our open highways even if not signwritten as DHL or postehaste etc.... There is so much stuff these days that is made/picked/packed/imported at the last minute these days and the customer NEEDS it tomorrow. The cut off, turnaround times and double handling means Rail couldn't take over modern freight even if it was mandated to.
And there isn't the land available these days for the railheads/shunting yards/sorting depo to make it work. Our former Railyards now have a PaknSave there....
A lot of the big trucks direct deliver their stuff to supermarkets/factories while your asleep. If it all came by rail there would be a tidal wave of metro trucks running around the city causing havoc. That and all the extra delays at the barrier arms (most cities with rail seem to be cut in half by it) would be worse than an occasional delay on open road.

As for damaging the roads, there have been some major improvements and widening of shoulders etc lately thanks to pressure from truck and cycle lobby groups. I bet some of this has already saved various car and biker lives without them realise when they've nodded off or had to swerve etc....

yes a lot of 'trucking' is 'courier' business really... however, there is still a vast amount of heavy, non urgent freight that could be shipped by rail cheaper, and with far less wear n tear on the roading system. Logging is onee area rail does extremely well compared to trucks..... just work out the cost of trucking 1600- 2000 tonnes of logs, compared to one freight train

[caspernz]

yes a lot of 'trucking' is 'courier' business really... however, there is still a vast amount of heavy, non urgent freight that could be shipped by rail cheaper, and with far less wear n tear on the roading system. Logging is onee area rail does extremely well compared to trucks..... just work out the cost of trucking 1600- 2000 tonnes of logs, compared to one freight train

In essence, and it's only an opinion based on my experiences and observations...road freight seems too cheap, for too many firms fight over contracts and then end up paying drivers peanuts, or go bust on a rate that didn't actually work. The approach to rail in this country seems a little off, it's not meant to be a stand-alone money making entity, it works rather well when the big picture is taken into account. Investment in rail reduces the number of trucks, this pays for itself in less wear and tear on roads, less congestion, less exposure to risk. But yeah, that's my European thinking for you. And heck, I accept my thinking may be wrong.

And as a regular on the Auckland to Mt Maunganui road, both for work and family reasons...the number of containers moved on that road by swarms of crappy trucks, that sort of stuff belongs on the train one would reasonably think?!

[R650R]

yes a lot of 'trucking' is 'courier' business really... however, there is still a vast amount of heavy, non urgent freight that could be shipped by rail cheaper, and with far less wear n tear on the roading system. Logging is onee area rail does extremely well compared to trucks..... just work out the cost of trucking 1600- 2000 tonnes of logs, compared to one freight train

Right I'm going to have to start a proper in depth thread on the weekend to explain it better....

But that 'vast' amount of freight that could be shipped 'cheaper'.... lets look at where you are in Wellington for example. Now you have a good setup for passenger rail but where is all that 'vast' amount of freight going to get unloaded and put out onto little trucks to be delivered. Can you imagine the tsunami of trucks climbing Ngaranga gorge to deliver up the road to petone, Johnsonville etc in the morning. For the average person a big shift to rail freight in NZ would result in exposure to more trucks and more congestion. The kiwi work ethic means a lot of big trucks direct deliver stuff during the night when the roads are empty. Picture all the courier vans you already see and imagine tenfold more but six wheeler trucks instead amongst your morning commute.
Yes sometimes logs go by rail from consolidation points to the mills but check out the terrain of the east coast. Kiwirails own report says no skid site is more than 73km away from the nearest timber mill or port. It doesn't make economic sense to double handle it 20km or so to rail head (which would have to be constructed and require extra log handling machinery, staff etc)......

[R650R]

In essence, and it's only an opinion based on my experiences and observations...road freight seems too cheap, for too many firms fight over contracts and then end up paying drivers peanuts, or go bust on a rate that didn't actually work. The approach to rail in this country seems a little off, it's not meant to be a stand-alone money making entity, it works rather well when the big picture is taken into account. Investment in rail reduces the number of trucks, this pays for itself in less wear and tear on roads, less congestion, less exposure to risk. But yeah, that's my European thinking for you. And heck, I accept my thinking may be wrong.

And as a regular on the Auckland to Mt Maunganui road, both for work and family reasons...the number of containers moved on that road by swarms of crappy trucks, that sort of stuff belongs on the train one would reasonably think?!

Part of the problem I think is too many of the owners siphon off the profits into their big boys toy collections.... paying someone decent money is only about one pallet space worth of revenue on a decent linehaul run.
And then theres the 'lifestyle' truckers who will work for nothing to drive the shiney wheels.
Not for me to worry about, my new trolley has painted wheels so no polishing, only has 4 axles and pay is better for local work than what many are getting here for linehaul in old cop magnet trucks....

[Scuba_Steve]

Part of the problem I think is too many of the owners siphon off the profits into their big boys toy collections.... paying someone decent money is only about one pallet space worth of revenue on a decent linehaul run.
And then theres the 'lifestyle' truckers who will work for nothing to drive the shiney wheels.
Not for me to worry about, my new trolley has painted wheels so no polishing, only has 4 axles and pay is better for local work than what many are getting here for linehaul in old cop magnet trucks....

Pay & moneys is part the reason Trucks win out over trains, train drivers avg 1.5x as much as the truckies, trains take alot more people to operate (all too on decent wages) as the driver doesn't unload & it's not direct, and not being direct also means trucks have to be involved anyways
So yea, for alot more money you could stop a few longhauls going down SH1/SH2 but is it really worth it? The open road is (or should be) built to take them & the person that was holding them up is still out there holding everyone else up, I guess the only difference is now you can see the real cause of the congestion instead of assuming it's the truck holding everyone up

[caspernz]

Pay & moneys is part the reason Trucks win out over trains, train drivers avg 1.5x as much as the truckies, trains take alot more people to operate (all too on decent wages) as the driver doesn't unload & it's not direct, and not being direct also means trucks have to be involved anyways
So yea, for alot more money you could stop a few longhauls going down SH1/SH2 but is it really worth it? The open road is (or should be) built to take them & the person that was holding them up is still out there holding everyone else up, I guess the only difference is now you can see the real cause of the congestion instead of assuming it's the truck holding everyone up

Nah, wages for the train crew aren't the core issue Scoober. Look at it in the sense of tonnage or cubes moved per crew, trains will always win. The trick is in applying the bulk moves by train correctly. Even in this country, with hilly windy rail, one train will move at least 30 truck loads in one hit. The sad part is that our rail network hasn't had enough investment over time, then add in deregulation :facepalm:

And if you knew how many flash linehaul trucks travel on that express sesame street routine only partly loaded...one would think partial regulation could benefit the country as a whole :innocent:

[Waihou Thumper]

Must be a great job hiding in the bushes spying on farmers. Wonder how you get on to that lark.:niceone:

All of that money spent in court getting there for a fine they will never see? Seems a bit pointless to me....
The sharemilkers don't even earn enough off the milk solids after take home...
Mind you, I think the poor attitude of the couple did it for them...:)

[pritch]

It surprises me how easy I find it to sit at 100 without glancing at the speedo. I'm used to my car. Bike too, actually.

Possibly that's because you did that at work all day? :devil2:

On the other hand things got tricky hereabout, even allowing for the major road construction. Leaving town the speed limit will change from whatever the temporary limit is to 50 briefly then to 70 briefly then 80, 100 for a k or so. Back to 80 for a few ks, up to 100 briefly then back to 80 for a few hundred metres before going back to 100. All of which probably won't do much for safety but should be a nice little earner.


And look what our resident geniuses have come up with now. If a single vehicle stops for any reason, all traffic in the only lane in that direction will be brought to a stop. But hey, it's only the main route north. They apparently forgot the part of Murphy's law that say, "If it can go wrong, it will go wrong."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/64887364/New-road-layout-tests-motorists-patience

[Jdogg]

Had a revenue collector yesterday, sitting at the end of the te horo passing lane heading south.

I was passing the usual numpty, that had been driving at 85_90ks, then sped up for the passing lane.....
I passed them at literally 103ks due to spotting the officer lasering me constantly (V1 was going nuts) the whole way down the passing lane.

The irony is, that 5k prior to the passing lane, there is a new road safety sign stating "don't take risks, wait for a passing lane" so I did - and I barely could.....

How is this type of speed trap helping ease the frustrations of slow drivers and creating smooth traffic flow?

He gave me a look and wagged his finger - really!! 103ks???

Just poor form -hardly a black spot at end of a straight 1k passing lane......

[R650R]

Pay & moneys is part the reason Trucks win out over trains, train drivers avg 1.5x as much as the truckies, trains take alot more people to operate (all too on decent wages) as the driver doesn't unload & it's not direct, and not being direct also means trucks have to be involved anyways
So yea, for alot more money you could stop a few longhauls going down SH1/SH2 but is it really worth it? The open road is (or should be) built to take them & the person that was holding them up is still out there holding everyone else up, I guess the only difference is now you can see the real cause of the congestion instead of assuming it's the truck holding everyone up

I wonder how many of the pro train lobby would give up their right to travel by car between cities/towns provinces. Eg the govt invests massively in rail and bans all but crucial supplies for road freight.
But to make the rail profitable they need passengers too so they ban travel in private car anywhere greater than 20km from your declared address, all other travel must be by bus or rail... can you imagine the outcry???
BTW that would massively lower the road toll too.....

[BlackSheepLogic]

Had a revenue collector yesterday, sitting at the end of the te horo passing lane heading south.

I was passing the usual numpty, that had been driving at 85_90ks, then sped up for the passing lane.....
I passed them at literally 103ks due to spotting the officer lasering me constantly (V1 was going nuts) the whole way down the passing lane.

The irony is, that 5k prior to the passing lane, there is a new road safety sign stating "don't take risks, wait for a passing lane" so I did - and I barely could.....

Seen the same tactics as well. They were a little more reasonable tho as I clipped pass at ~110 without issue.



I was passing the usual numpty, that had been driving at 85_90ks, then sped up for the passing lane.....

Had an instance over the holidays where a car in front took the passing lane to pass a slow & overly cautious driver. They drove along side until the passing lane finished and then moved back in behind. Next opportunity to pass I shut the gate.

[Flip]

The Rozza took a roasting on the news tonight.

[Kickaha]

I wonder how many of the pro train lobby would give up their right to travel by car between cities/towns provinces. Eg the govt invests massively in rail and bans all but crucial supplies for road freight.

Are you old enough to remember back to when rail was semi protected by a distance limit that trucks could operate to carrying certain types of freight?

[Scuba_Steve]

I wonder how many of the pro train lobby would give up their right to travel by car between cities/towns provinces. Eg the govt invests massively in rail and bans all but crucial supplies for road freight.
But to make the rail profitable they need passengers too so they ban travel in private car anywhere greater than 20km from your declared address, all other travel must be by bus or rail... can you imagine the outcry???
BTW that would massively lower the road toll too.....

From memory it was said there's only one rail in the world that has managed to turn their passenger side a profit & that's India where they also pack people in tight as they can & allow people to ride on top & out the side

Kiwirail (and thus the tax payer) would lose alot less money if they'd stop charging for fares & made the train free, go figure ay

[caspernz]

Are you old enough to remember back to when rail was semi protected by a distance limit that trucks could operate to carrying certain types of freight?

The poor service from rail in the pre-deregulation days is what most remember, unfortunately. Todays' environment with just in time thinking, doesn't fit with the rail approach, even if in reality it would benefit the country IMHO.

[R650R]

Are you old enough to remember back to when rail was semi protected by a distance limit that trucks could operate to carrying certain types of freight?

I'm well aware of how it was back in the day.... The day of state protectionism of its monopolistic enterprises.
Rail is probably a great thing in pioneer days when you don't have a modern road network, eg Napier to Taupo in a petrol powered Bedford truck was a 12 hr journey. But now its a....

[haydes55]

I just had a chat with an older lady at work. She was driving to raglan, coming into whatawhata, going between 80-100km/h (just cruising), she pulled over to let a car past (good bitch) then heard a police siren and pulled over, expecting the cop to chase the guy who overtook her for speeding. He parked up behind her and asked her why she pulled over for the faster guy...... Checked her license, rego, wof etc. Then sent her on her way.

Weird.

[scumdog]

I note in the news today a suggestion that the open road limit be reduced as low as 70km/hr as less people will die from not so greater impact when accidents do happen. I bet the police will collect a massive increase in revenue too.

You have your wires (and knickers) twisted over this.

The suggested 70kph was not for the 'open road' everywhere.

[Scuba_Steve]

You have your wires (and knickers) twisted over this.

The suggested 70kph was not for the 'open road' everywhere.

Just where it'll make the most $$$ right :bleh:

[jellywrestler]

I note in the news today a suggestion that the open road limit be reduced as low as 70km/hr as less people will die from not so greater impact when accidents do happen. I bet the police will collect a massive increase in revenue too.

link please

[Reckless]

I just had a chat with an older lady at work. She was driving to raglan, coming into whatawhata, going between 80-100km/h (just cruising), she pulled over to let a car past (good bitch) then heard a police siren and pulled over, expecting the cop to chase the guy who overtook her for speeding. He parked up behind her and asked her why she pulled over for the faster guy...... Checked her license, rego, wof etc. Then sent her on her way.

Weird.

WTF getting into trouble for letting faster Traffic through............OH dear what next????


Mind you you just cant fix stupid. 6 crashes in 24hours due to inattention or stupidity?
http://www.sunlive.co.nz/news/91076-six-crashes-24-hours.html

[haydes55]

A quote from the Herald today, talking about how confusing propoganda contributed to driving attitudes "He said as of yesterday, only 14 tickets were issued for speeds of between 1-4km over a speed limit, compared with the 13 tickets that were issued throughout the same period during the December 2013-January 2014 campaign"

So scumdog was right. On the other hand, the police advertised for a decent length of time about zero tolerance, said once on the news they were no longer and then continued with the advertising that any speed above the limit is speeding.... Very confusing, the typical driver would be exposed to the police saying they will be ticketed for 101km/h 100 times for every time the police said they wouldn't be that strict. The majority of drivers would believe police operated at zero tolerance all xmas/new years. Their belief in the stringent policing may have diverted their attention away from safe driving, to slow driving. Slower driving and safer driving are not a correlation.

[Ocean1]

confusing propoganda

Well, see it had to be "confusing", the alternative explanation for a huge PR fuckup that threatened to derail the current road policy set is that it's simply wrong.

Me? I'm going with wrong AND fucking silly.

[Berries]

A quote from the Herald today, talking about how confusing propoganda contributed to driving attitudes "He said as of yesterday, only 14 tickets were issued for speeds of between 1-4km over a speed limit, compared with the 13 tickets that were issued throughout the same period during the December 2013-January 2014 campaign"

So scumdog was right. On the other hand, the police advertised for a decent length of time about zero tolerance, said once on the news they were no longer and then continued with the advertising that any speed above the limit is speeding.... Very confusing, the typical driver would be exposed to the police saying they will be ticketed for 101km/h 100 times for every time the police said they wouldn't be that strict.
I am getting confused now. The open road speed limit is 100km/h. If you exceed that limit and are caught you should expect a ticket. Seems almost too simple to me.

[GrayWolf]

I wonder how many of the pro train lobby would give up their right to travel by car between cities/towns provinces. Eg the govt invests massively in rail and bans all but crucial supplies for road freight.
But to make the rail profitable they need passengers too so they ban travel in private car anywhere greater than 20km from your declared address, all other travel must be by bus or rail... can you imagine the outcry???
BTW that would massively lower the road toll too.....

OK to respond to a few of your 'points', accepted train drivers get a good wage??,,, but all these train crew?? Where did you get that idea? Freight is basically 'single manned' at best, a second in cab... hardly a 'mas of highly paid train crew'. Passenger? 1 driver, 1 guard, and a passenger operator per extra 2 car set. In peak times, they do add extra pass-op's on certain services. Out of peak, often just a train manager even on a 4 car set. We discussed this before, and as accepted then, that the historical sell off of rail property, shutting down of lines was a reprehensible act of stupidity.
Your point about logging? Rail carries the bulk, if not all, of the logging shipped out of Wellington Harbour, thousands of tonnes a week. Mainfrieght recently built their new huge depot... beside the kiwirail freight yard.

Profitability? currently freight is the largest earner of the group, passenger is the 'instant cash' group, whereas freight is a 'bill you, pay later' system. Hundreds of millions are being spent on the infrastructure in Wellington, again thanks to decades of profit leaching and non return to the network investment. Banning of cars is not the answer to gain 'profit' for rail... but rather than the billions spent on increasing road capacity, spend it on improving the level of, and the spreading of passenger rail services. Compared to other countries, the passenger service in Wellington is a cheap one, Auckland has spent massive amounts upgrading it's passenger service network.... There's where your 'profit' would arise from... increased patronage as it would simply be 'better' to go by train than by car.

[haydes55]

I am getting confused now. The open road speed limit is 100km/h. If you exceed that limit and are caught you should expect a ticket. Seems almost too simple to me.

But hundreds of thousands of people went past police between 1-4km/h over the speed limit and only 14 were ticketed. So they weren't focusing on the zero tolerance. So they did allow some tolerance. So drivers didn't need to stare at their speedo and slam on their brakes whenever they saw a cop.

[pete376403]

snip lots of railway stuff

Sounds line you know a fair bit about NZ rail - any idea why the Wgtn passenger stock is Korean yet the Auckland stuff is Spanish and almost completely different ( rail gauge seems to be the only common factor).

Wouldn't it have made more sense for Auckland to get the same as Wellington - one set of tools, one set of parts, bulk discounts, one training scheme, etc..?Just asking?

[scumdog]

So drivers didn't need to stare at their speedo and slam on their brakes whenever they saw a cop.

You wouldn't think that by the way some numb-nuts bleat on about it "Oh it will make my driving less safe 'cos I will have to look at my speedo all the time" blah-blah-blah.

So how did they get on when the tolerance was 10kph over and they treated that as a defacto 'speed limit'???:blink:

[Scuba_Steve]

You wouldn't think that by the way some numb-nuts bleat on about it "Oh it will make my driving less safe 'cos I will have to look at my speedo all the time" blah-blah-blah.

So how did they get on when the tolerance was 10kph over and they treated that as a defacto 'speed limit'???:blink:

It's the speed scam as a whole that is detrimental to safety not the chosen tolerance on the day

[Reckless]

Dog and Lemon guy recons Ad Campaigns, extra cops etc will never work, his Ideas here

http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Clive-Matthew-Wilson-Transport-safety-in-New-Zealand/tabid/506/articleID/62594/Default.aspx

[pzkpfw]

You wouldn't think that by the way some numb-nuts bleat on about it "Oh it will make my driving less safe 'cos I will have to look at my speedo all the time" blah-blah-blah.

So how did they get on when the tolerance was 10kph over and they treated that as a defacto 'speed limit'???:blink:

We drive cars with our foot on the gas, and can pretty much keep that foot steady, to hold speed. But we're not robots *. Add to that the need to adjust for (or just be affected by) road conditions (other vehicles, hills, bends, wind, ...) and there will be some variation. So when I drive, I don't/can't keep exactly to a single speed, there's always some variation, some plus or minus. (I know some knobs claim they can drive with zero variation). So, for example, I'm not trying/able to drive exactly at (or up to) 100 km/h on the open road, I'm trying to drive about 100 km/h - and keep the variation within reason. Let's assume 95 to 105. (That's just for illustration, I'm not claiming that +/- 5 was my exact variation of speed).

* Even using cruise control on my wagon, there's variation in my speed. (And my bike is very throttle-twitchy, and road sensitive, and 90-100 is so small on the speedo I can barely tell the difference.)

Anyway, this is why I always thought it was perfectly reasonable that there was some "tolerance".

You could argue that I should've just aimed a little lower, say at 95. With +/- 5 giving a range of 90 to 100, instead of 95 to 105; but that's just going to cause frustration for people behind me, when at any moment they are wanting or able to do 100 and I'm at that moment doing less ... everyone should be aiming at the same speed on the same piece of road. It would also take away the simplicity of the thought that "about 100" is the limit. (I'll admit that knowing my speedo under-reads, I usually aimed at something more like an indicated 100-110 (being 105 +/- 5, expected to really be 100 +/- 5), but that's a detail.)

Further, I'd say that most people understand that some kind of limit is needed (faster=hurtier, etc), but nobody seriously thinks that 100 km/h is "safe" but cars burst into flame at 101 km/h.

So, notwithstanding the road signs that say "100 is not a target", the zero tolerance strategy is basically saying people can ("can" meaning both allowed to and able to) drive up to exactly 100, groovy happy nice, but a blip over is somehow evil bad and all their fault.

It's unrealistic in more than one way. It's frustrating, and normal natural human frustration is an underappreciated factor in road use.

[Kiwi Graham]

You wouldn't think that by the way some numb-nuts bleat on about it "Oh it will make my driving less safe 'cos I will have to look at my speedo all the time" blah-blah-blah.

So how did they get on when the tolerance was 10kph over and they treated that as a defacto 'speed limit'???:blink:

Mate you can sit there and call people as many names as you like it aint going to fix it.

When the tolerance was 10k people would settle at an approx 100k and the speed would rise and fall according to road conditions.

Numpty comes along and says no tolerance now and people drive at 90k and their speed varies according to road conditions up or down meaning you now have people traveling as slow as 80k on 100k roads and/or watching their speedo so much to ensure they dont go over 100.
you should see how many people are hitting the picks when a cop car looms into sight even when traveling under the posted limit....just in case....

[swbarnett]

I am getting confused now. The open road speed limit is 100km/h. If you exceed that limit and are caught you should expect a ticket. Seems almost too simple to me.
Only if 1. All speedos are 100% accurate and 2. you can guarantee that all drivers can reasonably be expected to read their speedo with 100% accuracy.

No measuring device is 100% accurate and none can be read with 100% accuracy (even digital ones only read to +/1 1km).

[scumdog]

you should see how many people are hitting the picks when a cop car looms into sight even when traveling under the posted limit....just in case....

Nothing new - I've always done it.

But the 101kph thing is a right 'they sky is falling', people all 'assumed' they WOULD get a ticket for 1kph over the speed limit and drove accordingly.

Why do so many people always latch onto the most negative aspect of anything - and treat it as gospel????


'And they walk amongst us'

[swbarnett]

But the 101kph thing is a right 'they sky is falling', people all 'assumed' they WOULD get a ticket for 1kph over the speed limit and drove accordingly.
Those of us with no inside information can only believe what we are told - by the cop on the street in my case.


Why do so many people always latch onto the most negative aspect of anything - and treat it as gospel????
Human nature. An understanding of which I would've thought would be necessary in your line of work.

[_Shrek_]

I am getting confused now. The open road speed limit is 100km/h. If you exceed that limit and are caught you should expect a ticket. Seems almost too simple to me.

:shit: Berries getting a bit close to the truth here after all it is Kiwi Biker & we all know what's said on here is gospel :facepalm:

mrs S knows that there must have been a tolerance coz the :Police: sitting under the tree just :) as we went past after passing a ute along the straight

[R650R]

OK to respond to a few of your 'points', accepted train drivers get a good wage??,,, but all these train crew?? Where did you get that idea? Freight is basically 'single manned' at best, a second in cab... hardly a 'mas of highly paid train crew'. Passenger? 1 driver, 1 guard, and a passenger operator per extra 2 car set. In peak times, they do add extra pass-op's on certain services. Out of peak, often just a train manager even on a 4 car set. We discussed this before, and as accepted then, that the historical sell off of rail property, shutting down of lines was a reprehensible act of stupidity.
Your point about logging? Rail carries the bulk, if not all, of the logging shipped out of Wellington Harbour, thousands of tonnes a week. Mainfrieght recently built their new huge depot... beside the kiwirail freight yard.

Profitability? currently freight is the largest earner of the group, passenger is the 'instant cash' group, whereas freight is a 'bill you, pay later' system. Hundreds of millions are being spent on the infrastructure in Wellington, again thanks to decades of profit leaching and non return to the network investment. Banning of cars is not the answer to gain 'profit' for rail... but rather than the billions spent on increasing road capacity, spend it on improving the level of, and the spreading of passenger rail services. Compared to other countries, the passenger service in Wellington is a cheap one, Auckland has spent massive amounts upgrading it's passenger service network.... There's where your 'profit' would arise from... increased patronage as it would simply be 'better' to go by train than by car.

Errr that was Scuba who was talking about cashed up rail monkeys....
As for the Wellington logs prob from a consolidation yard at masterton which makes sense in that scenario as in centre of wairarapa region but whatever, they still have to get out of the forest first.
Yeah mainfreight and few of the other big boys always been big users of rail on the side, lot more than people realise. Now why do they have such a massive fleet of owner drivers when they have such easy rail access with rail sidings direct into many of their own yards???? Because a shitload of freight is demanded to be moved NOW by the customer. Not maybe tomorrow, not maybe this week but pick that shit up NOW and DELIVER it direct at XXam tomorrow....

With regard to passengers I'm saying if people want trucks of the road and less maintenance spent on roads then its only fair to force public to use trains and buses also. Be lot less speed tickets handed out though....

[Conquiztador]

And with the "No Tolerance For Speeding" that was in place this holiday period we had more killed on the road than last year... We have arrived at the number that is what we can expect with current roads, traffic law, amount of vehicles on the road etc. To now get a big drop in traffic deaths something, that in a major way changes the game, has to be implemented. Like taking one wheel off all cars... To throw more money on traffic policing, add campains, alcohol blitzes, or any of the current measures that are in place, will not make any big impact.

[FJRider]

And with the "No Tolerance For Speeding" that was in place this holiday period we had more killed on the road than last year...

So ... what percentage of those killed were traveling OVER the posted speed limit .. ???

It might be hard to apply a "No Tolerance" if they were not speeding.

[FJRider]

I am getting confused now. The open road speed limit is 100km/h. If you exceed that limit and are caught you should expect a ticket. Seems almost too simple to me.

But .. But .. But ... if the tolerance is 10 km/hr ... 110 is then "legal". No tolerance means 101 km/hr is 'legal".

[FJRider]

mrs S knows that there must have been a tolerance coz the :Police: sitting under the tree just :) as we went past after passing a ute along the straight

The cop would have been asleep ... or on the phone to his/her missus ...


Or your overtaking just was not seen as dangerous.

[Conquiztador]

So ... what percentage of those killed were traveling OVER the posted speed limit .. ???

It might be hard to apply a "No Tolerance" if they were not speeding.

Well, the point really is that focusing on the speed as the solution to it all is clearly not working. Infact it might be counter productive (more killed this year...)

[FJRider]

Well, the point really is that focusing on the speed as the solution to it all is clearly not working. Infact it might be counter productive (more killed this year...)

No tolerance is for speeds OVER the posted speed limit. If crashes and deaths occur with vehicles UNDER the posted speed limit ... the "No tolerance" does not enter/apply to ... the "Cause" equation in the resulting accident report ...

[mossy1200]

Nothing new - I've always done it.

But the 101kph thing is a right 'they sky is falling', people all 'assumed' they WOULD get a ticket for 1kph over the speed limit and drove accordingly.

Why do so many people always latch onto the most negative aspect of anything - and treat it as gospel????


'And they walk amongst us'

All the signs around wellington say 100 and if your over you will be stopped. That will be why.

[FJRider]

All the signs around wellington say 100 and if your over you will be stopped. That will be why.

I'm not in Welington so I don't care.

Obviously then ... the "Tolerance" does NOT apply to ME ...

[mossy1200]

I'm not in Welington so I don't care.

Obviously then ... the "Tolerance" does NOT apply to ME ...

Unless your passing through the area your all good.

[FJRider]

Unless your passing through the area your all good.

I'm trying to avoid the place ... it's working so far ... <_<

[Conquiztador]

No tolerance is for speeds OVER the posted speed limit. If crashes and deaths occur with vehicles UNDER the posted speed limit ... the "No tolerance" does not enter/apply to ... the "Cause" equation in the resulting accident report ...

The way to get the numbers down was to police so hard that we would NOT go over the speed limit. Money was spent telling us that, tickets were issued. We were to be bent in to shape! We are now hearing that it worked (less speeding tickets, so obviously the "message" is getting home). BUT THERE WERE MORE KILLED ON OUR ROADS!! I therefore ask; When will it become clear that the speed is NOT the problem? That making the speed the most important thing is wrong? That scare tactics and punishment is not working?

[FJRider]

The way to get the numbers down was to police so hard that we would NOT go over the speed limit. Money was spent telling us that, tickets were issued. We were to be bent in to shape! We are now hearing that it worked (less speeding tickets, so obviously the "message" is getting home). BUT THERE WERE MORE KILLED ON OUR ROADS!! I therefore ask; When will it become clear that the speed is NOT the problem? That making the speed the most important thing is wrong? That scare tactics and punishment is not working?

Perhaps ... no tolerance on stupidity ...


Open season folks ...

[awayatc]

Nothing new - I've always done it.

But the 101kph thing is a right 'they sky is falling', people all 'assumed' they WOULD get a ticket for 1kph over the speed limit and drove accordingly.

Why do so many people always latch onto the most negative aspect of anything - and treat it as gospel????


'And they walk amongst us'

why did we treated it as gospel. ?.?

because of WHO was delivering the warnings (threats)..

and how often....

on the TV, on the radio...., on posters....papers etc etc etc.

we didnt make it up.

if somebody says he has a gun and is gonna shoot you, would you react to that ?
or do you only do something after you see the gun/ get shot .?

[swbarnett]

Perhaps ... no tolerance on stupidity ...
Unfortunately that would deny what it is to be human. No point hitting people for something that's beyond their control.

[haydes55]

Who has heard the phrase "I'm a safe driver, I never speed"?

All too often muttered by the very people who fill morgues.

For far too long the message of speed kills has been the one slogan and almost sole target for police (as a general rule). People are driving dangerously, but below the speed limit. I'd hazard a guess there will be 20 speed related "safety" ads for every ad that mentions poor driving, yet speed without poor driving is safer than eating a marshmallow. But driving dangerously below the speed limit kills hundreds of peoplea year (last stat I heard was 80% of fatalities occurred below the speed limit).

Change the mentality of average Joe from "I'm safe, I don't speed" to "I drive safely and defensively to survive". That would reduce the road toll, that would be as simple as a few ads addressing actual common driver errors. Actually enforcing every other traffic law.

Sidenote, why don't we have higher speed limits for arterial routes? Discourage use of minor roads, which are usually in worse condition, speed up travel times, so less time spent on the road and keep drivers focussed on driving, instead of going into zombie mode.

[GrayWolf]

Nothing new - I've always done it.

But the 101kph thing is a right 'they sky is falling', people all 'assumed' they WOULD get a ticket for 1kph over the speed limit and drove accordingly.

Why do so many people always latch onto the most negative aspect of anything - and treat it as gospel????


'And they walk amongst us'


complete crap Scummy,
you know full well how 'use of language' can have a required effect, interrogator's, advertiser's have a good working knowledge and use it to project the required message, or extract information. The message was "go over 100 and you WILL be pulled over"... Even if there was a 'disclaimer' that you will get a 'talking to' under 104, the fact of being pulled over has an instant 'fear effect', and you bloody full well know that.
Psychology 101, Pavlov, a trained response to a particular stimuli.
the driving public have reacted EXACTLY as was intended by the message and advertising campaign.
You buggers (head Popo) wanted the reaction you got.

[scumdog]

complete crap Scummy,
you know full well how 'use of language' can have a required effect, interrogator's, advertiser's have a good working knowledge and use it to project the required message, or extract information. The message was "go over 100 and you WILL be pulled over"... Even if there was a 'disclaimer' that you will get a 'talking to' under 104, the fact of being pulled over has an instant 'fear effect', and you bloody full well know that.
Psychology 101, Pavlov, a trained response to a particular stimuli.
the driving public have reacted EXACTLY as was intended by the message and advertising campaign.
You buggers (head Popo) wanted the reaction you got.

So where did the 'pulled over' = 'speeding ticket' come from??

THAT is my issue with this topic.

(The public need to actually think, not dissolve into paranoia...although with seat-belts and cell-phone usage it might be a good thing, sadly for some odd reason it isn't)

[haydes55]

So where did the 'pulled over' = 'speeding ticket' come from??



THAT is my issue with this topic.



(The public need to actually think, not dissolve into paranoia...although with seat-belts and cell-phone usage it might be a good thing, sadly for some odd reason it isn't)


"Anything over the speed limit is speeding" next slogan is "if you speed, expect a ticket". I wonder where people get the ideas that they will be ticketed for 101km/h.... From the 100 billboards, radio ads and tv ads which all say they will or imply they will.

[scumdog]

"Anything over the speed limit is speeding" next slogan is "if you speed, expect a ticket". I wonder where people get the ideas that they will be ticketed for 101km/h.... From the 100 billboards, radio ads and tv ads which all say they will or imply they will.

Must be in the readers mind-set, I never saw it that way, never thought "Oh my. if I get seen doing 101kph I'll get a ticket".
So I never bothered to change my driving/riding habits.

Still, whatever spins your wheels.....;)

[swbarnett]

So where did the 'pulled over' = 'speeding ticket' come from??

THAT is my issue with this topic.

(The public need to actually think, not dissolve into paranoia...although with seat-belts and cell-phone usage it might be a good thing, sadly for some odd reason it isn't)
Best thing on this subject that's ever been said:

A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

[GrayWolf]

Must be in the readers mind-set, I never saw it that way, never thought "Oh my. if I get seen doing 101kph I'll get a ticket".
So I never bothered to change my driving/riding habits.

Still, whatever spins your wheels.....;)

oh ferrchissake,
Scummy it was stated, we WILL stop you, for anything over 100kph.... that's where the public 'got it' from..... as you seem to blithely glibe over, it was a use of language, of course you can say with 'hand on heart' we never said we would ticket you for less than 104, but you know full well the 'inference' is there.. it was what exact use of language was for, to place the 'idea' in peoples minds... getting stopped = a ticket, you know that's how people think, especially those who are general law abiding people who dont have anything to do with the popo, so stop being so obtuse.

[Madness]

So I never bothered to change my driving/riding habits.

Me neither. I don't see what all the fuss is about to be honest :no:

[swbarnett]

getting stopped = a ticket, you know that's how people think,
Actually, I'm not convinced he does. The blue gang seem to have a singular lack of understanding of human nature. They sure as hell ignore it often enough.

[Kiwi Graham]

Must be in the readers mind-set, I never saw it that way, never thought "Oh my. if I get seen doing 101kph I'll get a ticket".
So I never bothered to change my driving/riding habits.

Still, whatever spins your wheels.....;)

Ya see thats the issue right there. you dont see it "that way" so "that way" must be wrong.

The sooner the police loose that attitude the sooner they will start gaining respect back.

[awayatc]

The sooner the police loose that attitude the sooner they will start gaining respect back.

be quicker and easier to grow tails .........

some things just don't come back....

[swbarnett]

be quicker and easier to grow tails .........

some things just don't come back....
Chicken and egg story really. It's not just the police that have the "us & them" mentality. It seems to pervade almost the whole of society.

[caspernz]

"Anything over the speed limit is speeding" next slogan is "if you speed, expect a ticket". I wonder where people get the ideas that they will be ticketed for 101km/h.... From the 100 billboards, radio ads and tv ads which all say they will or imply they will.

Yep. All the billboards (and media reports) I've seen/heard leading up to, and during this holiday season, said stuff like "anything over the limit is speeding" and "if you're over the limit expect to be stopped" so focusing on whether one would or wouldn't get a ticket for 101 is semantics on the part of police isn't it?

For Joe Public who ventures out onto the big road only a few times a year...the stage is thus set for an already nervous type of driver to focus on the wrong thing perhaps? Add a few impatient/aggro/frustrated drivers who get annoyed with the above...

Kinda feel for the decision makers at Police HQ though, for it's gotta be hard to steer a course the public will buy into, and thus get results. Or has the road toll simply got to the point we should stop pouring endless resources into a diminishing results arena?

[Conquiztador]

oh ferrchissake,
Scummy it was stated, we WILL stop you, for anything over 100kph.... that's where the public 'got it' from..... as you seem to blithely glibe over, it was a use of language, of course you can say with 'hand on heart' we never said we would ticket you for less than 104, but you know full well the 'inference' is there.. it was what exact use of language was for, to place the 'idea' in peoples minds... getting stopped = a ticket, you know that's how people think, especially those who are general law abiding people who dont have anything to do with the popo, so stop being so obtuse.

I can't believe I am about to do this.... but here goes. Was I the only one who heard (on radio) that the "101 is speeding and you will be stopped" was not gonna happen and that the police had reverted back to 104? I put it down to the issues convincing a judge that the driver was doing 100.5 and not 100.4 where rounding up or down (Swedish Ronding) would happen to decide if it was spot on 100 or 1k over at 101. But that was only my assumption.

So as much as I hate all this (see my earlier posts in this thread) I will defend the police re the "nothing has changed" and it was always 104kph.

[FJRider]

... No point hitting people for something that's beyond their control.

It might make Me feel better though .. :innocent:

[scumdog]

Actually, I'm not convinced he does. The blue gang seem to have a singular lack of understanding of human nature. They sure as hell ignore it often enough.

20+ years at the freezing works plus one or two other jobs over the years certainly gave me an understanding of human nature, when I left there I had no expectations that people outside the works were any different.

And KB again proves that people are the same everywhere.

One common theme: When you're a cop people think you've been one from the time you left school.... and if one or two cops blot their copy, say something the non-cops don't agree with or similar? - then the rest of them must be just the same.

THAT is an aspect of human nature. ces't la vie

[swbarnett]

I can't believe I am about to this.... but here goes. Was I the only one who heard (on radio) that the "101 is speeding and you will be stopped" was not gonna happen and that the police had reverted back to 104? I put it down to the issues convincing a judge that the driver was doing 100.5 and not 100.4 where rounding up or down (Swedish Ronding) would happen to decide if it was spot on 100 or 1k over at 101. But that was only my assumption.

So as much as I hate all this (see my earlier posts in this thread) I will defend the police re the "nothing has changed" and it was always 104kph.
I was told by a cop on the road after that radio message that "no tolerance" was very much still on.

[swbarnett]

20+ years at the freezing works plus one or two other jobs over the years certainly gave me an understanding of human nature, when I left there I had no expectations that people outside the works were any different.

And KB again proves that people are the same everywhere.

One common theme: When you're a cop people think you've been one from the time you left school.... and if one or two cops blot their copy, say something the non-cops don't agree with or similar? - then the rest of them must be just the same.

THAT is an aspect of human nature. ces't la vie
And yet you (the police in general that is) still expect to get the road toll town to unrealistic levels. A zero road toll is a pipe-dream.

[haydes55]

I can't believe I am about to this.... but here goes. Was I the only one who heard (on radio) that the "101 is speeding and you will be stopped" was not gonna happen and that the police had reverted back to 104? I put it down to the issues convincing a judge that the driver was doing 100.5 and not 100.4 where rounding up or down (Swedish Ronding) would happen to decide if it was spot on 100 or 1k over at 101. But that was only my assumption.

So as much as I hate all this (see my earlier posts in this thread) I will defend the police re the "nothing has changed" and it was always 104kph.


They said on a 5 minute segment on the news, the zero tolerance was not being adhered to, and in a couple of radio interviews.... So the majority of drivers, who don't watch the news or don't listen to talkback radio, were none the wiser, the advertising kept up with the speeding is a crime, 101km/h is speeding blah blah blah etc. I read the herald, I look on stuff, I didn't find an article about their policy retraction. I listen to several different radio stations, none of which have ever said a message from the police saying they retracted their policy. I watch tv, again most channels, never once saw mention of police not adhering to zero tolerance.


How would the commerce commission take this case if, instead of the police, it was briscoes. Briscoes advertise for a couple of weeks "Huge sale, 75% off teaspoons", briscoes then sees they would go bankrupt for selling teaspoons at such ludicrously low prices, so they go on a talkback show, retract the sale, get a mention on the news, then keep advertising "best prices on teaspoons!". The briscoes lady would get assfucked into bankruptcy in fines.

[Madness]

I was told by a cop on the road after that radio message that "no tolerance" was very much still on.

Was that while he was giving you a ticket?

I tend to just jump in or on a vehicle and operate it myself. I don't feel the need to log onto Stuff, The Harold or switch on the telly or phone Briscoes to check the daily speed enforcement policy. Nah, I just get out there & do it. Living on the edge I think is what Cassina calls it.

[_Shrek_]

They said on a 5 minute segment on the news, the zero tolerance was not being adhered to, and in a couple of radio interviews.... So the majority of drivers, who don't watch the news or don't listen to talkback radio, were none the wiser, the advertising kept up with the speeding is a crime, 101km/h is speeding blah blah blah etc. I read the herald, I look on stuff, I didn't find an article about their policy retraction. I listen to several different radio stations, none of which have ever said a message from the police saying they retracted their policy. I watch tv, again most channels, never once saw mention of police not adhering to zero tolerance.

in our neck of the woods they're doing up the main street with new seal 50kph is now 30kph :Police: not around people doing 30kph :Police: around people still doing 30kph not dropping down to 20kph... as you see in the big places or open road where the holiday nutters are...
rule of thump is get in your car,truck or onya bike & drive, then drive to the posted limit or road conditions & if you're worried about your speedo not being right... get a GPS & check it & you will most likely go :shit: I can actually go faster in most cases

[swbarnett]

Was that while he was giving you a ticket?
Indeed it was. The lack of tolerance didn't matter on the day though. Biggest thing that annoyed me on the day was that I'd passed about six other cops while doing the same speed and none of them batted an eyelid.

[awayatc]

Chicken and egg story really. It's not just the police that have the "us & them" mentality. It seems to pervade almost the whole of society.

We all are product of our upbringing....

In the military units where I got mine, respect couldn't be demanded....

it had to be earned....

consequently, saluting for instance ,was optional.....

[BlackSheepLogic]

One common theme: When you're a cop people think you've been one from the time you left school.... and if one or two cops blot their copy, say something the non-cops don't agree with or similar? - then the rest of them must be just the same

It's not about the average officer, nor is it disrespect for the work they do.

This all started when one of your big wigs got their 5 mins of media fame. His negative attitude, demeanor, and ranting set the tone for what followed. The Road safety aspect got forgotten due to the way the message was delivered.

[GrayWolf]

Yep. All the billboards (and media reports) I've seen/heard leading up to, and during this holiday season, said stuff like "anything over the limit is speeding" and "if you're over the limit expect to be stopped" so focusing on whether one would or wouldn't get a ticket for 101 is semantics on the part of police isn't it?

For Joe Public who ventures out onto the big road only a few times a year...the stage is thus set for an already nervous type of driver to focus on the wrong thing perhaps? Add a few impatient/aggro/frustrated drivers who get annoyed with the above...

Kinda feel for the decision makers at Police HQ though, for it's gotta be hard to steer a course the public will buy into, and thus get results. Or has the road toll simply got to the point we should stop pouring endless resources into a diminishing results arena?

Well I cant argue that point, dont listen to the radio, work shifts so 'MI-SKY' is my friend. Dont buy newspapers.... BUT! See the zero tolerence {anything over 100 is speeding} etc, etc billboard posters all over wellington region. Please also note, that in none of their posts have the resident Popo actually stated directly 104..... 'nothing has changed, etc' is INFERENCE', just like the 'INFERENCE' of ticketing on their campaign.
Joe public will hear/see the inference and behave accordingly, remember these adverts and wording are written by 'experts' not your local 'beat noddy'.

[swbarnett]

We all are product if our upbringing....
True. Also true is that when we reach adulthood we are responsible for ourselves and can't afford to blame our upbringing for how we act and what we think. If we do we are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

[swbarnett]

remember these adverts and wording are written by 'experts' not your local 'beat noddy'.
Yeah, expert spin-doctors.

[scumdog]

Yeah, expert spin-doctors.

Who I try to ignore...

[haydes55]

Who I try to ignore...


I ignore my boss sometimes, he can't do my job.

[SPman]

We all are product of our upbringing....

In the military units where I got mine, respect couldn't be demanded....

it had to be earned....

consequently, saluting for instance ,was optional.....

Navy?.....

[SPman]

Yeah, expert spin-doctors.
Like that fuckhead from Monash university who seems to be the Australia & NZ talking head on "road safety"! The road toll is too high in rural WA so his solution? Drop the limit from 110 to 90 over the entire state! Ignore the fact that most (sealed) rural roads have 6m of seal, about 1.2m a side of pea gravel (and I mean small round peashaped gravel) then a row of old trees - which tend to stop you dead in your tracks, literally. And, he says, it should be rigidly enforced - no tolerance! It's bad enough going up the coast to Broome at 110 k limit for the 2300kms each way. being restricted to 90 would be ludicrous - luckily the State government has told this prick to fuck off - but it's only a matter of time.....
Anyway - aren't radars/lasers only actually accurate to +/- 1.5kph @ 100?
The whole thing seems to be an exercise in obsessive pedantry to me.

[swbarnett]

Who I try to ignore...
Good for you. I wish more people would take the higher ground. One of my pet hates is people that do things that are against their core principles just because it puts food on the table. Don't get me wrong, I don't really blame the average Joe or Josephine for caving in but if we all stuck to our core principles the corporates and government wouldn't be able to get away with the crap they do.

[rastuscat]

Good for you. I wish more people would take the higher ground. One of my pet hates is people that do things that are against their core principles just because it puts food on the table. Don't get me wrong, I don't really blame the average Joe or Josephine for caving in but if we all stuck to our core principles the corporates and government wouldn't be able to get away with the crap they do.

The hard part is to weave our own beliefs into the corporate structure, as those who head toward the top of the structure have normally done so by either believing the party line (regardless of the sense of it) or by compromising their own beliefs for the purpose of advancement.

That's probably why I've risen to the dizzy height I have, and I'm unlikely to rise further. Because I don't believe everything I would have to in order to progress higher. I also think I have a lot to contribute at my present level, and I can see a lot of that disappearing if I get any higher.

Still, people tend to work for a variety of reasons. One of those is to get paid. So it sometimes means doing stuff you don't want to, in order to get paid. If the job was totally because of what we wanted to do, it's unlikely they'd pay us to do it.

It sure is a big compromise. I recently had time with a guy who is a card dealer at a casino. We spent a day in a foreign town, just being tourists. He doesn't agree with gambling, but works at a casino. That's one compromise I wouldn't do myself.

[scumdog]

The hard part is to weave our own beliefs into the corporate structure, as those who head toward the top of the structure have normally done so by either believing the party line (regardless of the sense of it) or by compromising their own beliefs for the purpose of advancement.

That's probably why I've risen to the dizzy height I have, and I'm unlikely to rise further. Because I don't believe everything I would have to in order to progress higher. I also think I have a lot to contribute at my present level, and I can see a lot of that disappearing if I get any higher.

Still, people tend to work for a variety of reasons. One of those is to get paid. So it sometimes means doing stuff you don't want to, in order to get paid. If the job was totally because of what we wanted to do, it's unlikely they'd pay us to do it.

It sure is a big compromise.

Pretty much sums up my whole approach and attitude - and similarly explains my lack of 'dizzy hight' rank despite my years in the job!

[swbarnett]

He doesn't agree with gambling, but works at a casino. That's one compromise I wouldn't do myself.
Indeed neither would I. Although the consequences may not be as severe I liken this to POWs that drove trucks for the Japanese in WWII.

[rastuscat]

Indeed neither would I. Although the consequences may not be as severe I liken this to POWs that drove trucks for the Japanese in WWII.

Those guys did what they had to to stay alive. I have no criticism for that.

[caspernz]

Indeed neither would I. Although the consequences may not be as severe I liken this to POWs that drove trucks for the Japanese in WWII.

Try peace keeping missions and being given orders you don't agree with. Civilian life still cracks me up, folks worry about the most menial things...:oi-grr:

[swbarnett]

Those guys did what they had to to stay alive. I have no criticism for that.
That's one side of the argument that may have merit. On the other hand every POW driving a truck released a Japanese soldier to go and kill their mates. "All that is required for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing". Or in this case help the enemy.

[FJRider]

Garrick Tremain had theory ...

[FJRider]

And as for the ACC levy's ...

[swbarnett]

Try peace keeping missions and being given orders you don't agree with. Civilian life still cracks me up, folks worry about the most menial things...:oi-grr:
First world problems all right. This is exactly why I will never enter into any kind of military organisation. My right to refuse an order because it's against my core principles is a fundamental right that I hold dear. If I was conscripted I'd probably end up being court martialed for insubordination.

[swbarnett]

Garrick Tremain had theory ...
Even going to a charity leaves them open to accusations of nepotism.


And as for the ACC levy's ...
And this is completely backwards. protecting our right to partake in the things that make life worth living is exactly why ACC is so useful to a society (if it were run properly).

[FJRider]

Even going to a charity leaves them open to accusations of nepotism.

Surely the simple fact the Government slush fund is not getting any of it ... not make you smile at the thought .. ??? ;)


And this is completely backwards. protecting our right to partake in the things that make life worth living is exactly why ACC is so useful to a society (if it were run properly).

But ... "Our" rights come with a cost. You didn't mention personal responsibility though ... or is that not one of "Our" rights .. ???

[swbarnett]

Surely the simple fact the Government slush fund is not getting any of it ... not make you smile at the thought .. ??? ;)
Yes and no. The government will still get the political mileage. I'd rather see cash confiscated and burned.


But ... "Our" rights come with a cost. You didn't mention personal responsibility though ... or is that not one of "Our" rights .. ???
Personal responsibility is such a sliding scale that it can't be factored into any ACC type scheme. As far as I'm concerned one can free-climb El Capitan WITHOUT safety ropes if that floats your boat and I'll still contribute to a scheme that will pick up the tab when you fall off. Any thought to the contrary is a step down the path to banning bikes and all other activities that don't involve cotton wool.

[speedpro]

It seemed worthwhile to repost this from January 2015:

"I'd like to see fully "independent" analysis of crash statistics, and driving in general for that matter. Of course the data collection would have to be "independent" as well. No point analysing skewed data. If that was possible I would expect the information could be used to formulate some worthwhile policy, such as but not limited to tougher driving tests. The politicians of course would select the experts to perform the "independent" analysis and the terms of reference would be worded such that the only possible outcome of the independent analysis would be that "speed kills" and gosh isn't the government doing a wonderful job.
I have serious trouble with the stats and their analysis that are provided. It could be that I'm wrong about speed (not) being the big demon but I've seen nothing I would consider reliable to back up the assertion.

I must be getting old, I find myself nodding in agreement with Winston again. Had to laugh that the Police hierarchy got all offended saying he was trying to make political gain from the road toll. Really? Winston? Of course they were going to express offence, their policy of strict enforcement has been a complete failure. We should be offended that so many of us have died unnecessarily whilst the Police are checking for drivers going 1Km/h over the limit."

[scumdog]

It seemed worthwhile to repost this from January 2015:

"I'd like to see fully "independent" analysis of crash statistics, and driving in general for that matter. Of course the data collection would have to be "independent" as well. No point analysing skewed data. If that was possible I would expect the information could be used to formulate some worthwhile policy, such as but not limited to tougher driving tests. The politicians of course would select the experts to perform the "independent" analysis and the terms of reference would be worded such that the only possible outcome of the independent analysis would be that "speed kills" and gosh isn't the government doing a wonderful job.
I have serious trouble with the stats and their analysis that are provided. It could be that I'm wrong about speed (not) being the big demon but I've seen nothing I would consider reliable to back up the assertion.

I must be getting old, I find myself nodding in agreement with Winston again. Had to laugh that the Police hierarchy got all offended saying he was trying to make political gain from the road toll. Really? Winston? Of course they were going to express offence, their policy of strict enforcement has been a complete failure. We should be offended that so many of us have died unnecessarily whilst the Police are checking for drivers going 1Km/h over the limit."


So (a) how many have got tickets for 1kph over the speed limit?

And (b) does not a lower speed at time of impact not ( generally) result in less damage to all concerned?

[speedpro]

So (a) how many have got tickets for 1kph over the speed limit?

And (b) does not a lower speed at time of impact not ( generally) result in less damage to all concerned?

a - from 2015, media coverage of spoutings from a Police spokesdick suggested a "0" tolerance, i.e. - 1Kmh over and you get a ticket.
b - if the impact is avoided then speed is irrelevant.

Plumber I was using at work had a person pull out in front of him last December(2017). His latest surgery was in November(2018). Other than the fact both vehicles were moving, speed was not a factor.

Motorcyclist killed near Johnsonville recently. Car driver going the wrong way on the motorway, speed was not a factor. As an aside to this particular event, if they had both been keeping to the left unless overtaking, they would have harmlessly passed each other by.

Multiple head-on crashes over this Christas/New Year period. Was speed a factor that caused the head-on crash? Speed will have contributed to the outcome BUT did it cause the crash? If not, which I suspect given my own observations, then why isn't what "caused" the accident being addressed, or is that too hard?

Not having a crash is preferable, surely? I wouldn't care if the other driver was going slow enough that I didn't die. I would prefer not to have the crash.

[Murray]

The faster you go the bigger the impact! what part of that do you not understand? It is not about speed causing the accident!

[husaberg]

a - from 2015, media coverage of spoutings from a Police spokesdick suggested a "0" tolerance, i.e. - 1Kmh over and you get a ticket.
b - if the impact is avoided then speed is irrelevant.

Plumber I was using at work had a person pull out in front of him last December(2017). His latest surgery was in November(2018). Other than the fact both vehicles were moving, speed was not a factor.

Motorcyclist killed near Johnsonville recently. Car driver going the wrong way on the motorway, speed was not a factor. As an aside to this particular event, if they had both been keeping to the left unless overtaking, they would have harmlessly passed each other by.

Multiple head-on crashes over this Christas/New Year period. Was speed a factor that caused the head-on crash? Speed will have contributed to the outcome BUT did it cause the crash? If not, which I suspect given my own observations, then why isn't what "caused" the accident being addressed, or is that too hard?

Not having a crash is preferable, surely? I wouldn't care if the other driver was going slow enough that I didn't die. I would prefer not to have the crash.
I think the reasoning is its easier to police the speed than the dangerous driving is, its simpler and not as subjective, They have just picked the easier less subjective option.

[Scuba_Steve]

The faster you go the bigger the impact! what part of that do you not understand? It is not about speed causing the accident!

Not quite that simple tho is it?
30Tonne truck at the old 80km/h will do the same damage as a old 80's 1Tonne car at 440km/h
It's not about speed causing the accident, it's the inforcement of speed being detrimental to road & public safety at large

[speedpro]

The faster you go the bigger the impact! what part of that do you not understand? It is not about speed causing the accident!

It isn't hard to understand.

I think more(some) effort should be put in to avoiding the impact, not just lessening the consequence of an impact. The main message about driving, in particular holiday period driving, focuses on speed and reducing it to lessen the death and mayhem "when" an impact happens?

I'll give you 3 choices
1 - high speed impact
2 - lower speed impact
3 - no impact.

I prefer #3 myself.

Why isn't there some effort in trying to achieve #3 instead of the low hanging fruit(#2)?. My thoughts are that avoided crashes are hard to record and quantify. The media sure never writes articles about how the number of crashes, of any severity, has reduced. not often anyway.
It's the same idiotic logic that sees a 100kmh stretch of road have the speed reduced to 90kmh after a few bozos doing 140kmh crash. The bozos weren't obeying the 100kmh limit. What logic tells the NZTA that they will obey a lower limit? The only drivers obeying the lower limit are us law abiding types. Plus on this particular piece of road I'm thinking of, I've heard a rumour(cough) of it being navigated successfully at a lot higher speed, so I wonder if speed was actually a factor in the crashes at all or was it primarily incompetence? Incompetence leading to driving at a speed higher than suitable for the situation, vehicle, and driver ability. I'm not starting a discussion about measuring ability though I do wonder how many NZ drivers would manage to obtain a licence in say Germany.

[jellywrestler]

Motorcyclist killed near Johnsonville recently. Car driver going the wrong way on the motorway, speed was not a factor. As an aside to this particular event, if they had both been keeping to the left unless overtaking, they would have harmlessly passed each other by.

it was three AM and the driver on the wrong side 72 years old, i've no idea how long she'd been on the motorway and still not realised the armco was on the wrong side, so doubt keeping left wasn't very much in her mind. As for the motorcyclist, along there one would assume that he assumed the oncoming car was just an oncoming car, at 100km'h each way the moment he may have suddenly worked out it was on his patch of road would've meant very little time to react, if any,
bit of a freak accident really

[jasonu]

So (a) how many have got tickets for 1kph over the speed limit?

And (b) does not a lower speed at time of impact not ( generally) result in less damage to all concerned?

They should be concentrating on the absolutely abysmal general standard of driving on NZ roads rather than worrying about a couple or so kays over the limit. I visit NZ every couple of years or so and every time the local driving looks to be worse.

Making the drivers license test a LOT harder would be a good start but that isn't as good a cash cow as dishing out bullshit tickets.

[jellywrestler]

They should be concentrating on the absolutely abysmal general standard of driving on NZ roads rather than worrying about a couple or so kays over the limit. I visit NZ every couple of years or so and every time the local driving looks to be worse.

Making the drivers license test a LOT harder would be a good start but that isn't as good a cash cow as dishing out bullshit tickets.

cameras in cop cars catching all offences, the cops rely on the calibrated machines to back them up at the moment so they don't waste their day in court,
Run cameras, they record the evidence, ticket the driver, and then it's not the cops issue anymore as the recorded evidence is there.
maybe then we'll see a change in road behaviour.

[Hoonicorn]

Zero tolerance on speed results in people travelling at 5k or more under the limit. (waits for "it's a limit not a target" comments).

When they are frequently looking at their speed to make sure they haven't crept up over the limit by a few ks means they are spending less time watching the road, watching their speed becomes a distraction for everyone without cruise-control.

Someone commented that it's easier to police speed, I agree. Just stick a speed detector by the side of the road and you'll catch a dozen. Not a single tail-gater or lane swapper who doesn't check their mirrors (or indicates) gets caught, but someone travelling at 106 gets busted. Hell, the worst speeders usually know where all the cameras are and have radar detectors, so they can go 120 and then slow when they get near a camera.

Speed can be an issue if the current weather and road conditions don't support travelling at the posted speed limit (or over the posted limit), or if there is a recommended slower speed on a bend, but for most of us the trigger for accidents are the bad drivers who make dangerous over-takes, tail-gate/rear end, pull out in front of us at stop signs, don't signal when changing lanes, drink and drive, have unsafe vehicles, and generally can't drive for shit and put other road users at risk.

Then we realise why the speed limits are for us, so we have a better chance of surviving when we encounter those idiots on the road.

[FJRider]

They should be concentrating on the absolutely abysmal general standard of driving on NZ roads rather than worrying about a couple or so kays over the limit. I visit NZ every couple of years or so and every time the local driving looks to be worse.


It's always amazing how the driving standard improves ... when a police car is seen following ... which indicates more of arrogance and laziness than actual ability to drive in my opinion.

[FJRider]

I think the reasoning is its easier to police the speed than the dangerous driving is, its simpler and not as subjective, They have just picked the easier less subjective option.

The biggest issue I've seen the roads in the last month is dangerous overtaking. Even trying to overtake a truck and trailer travelling (governed) at 90 km/hr at 104 km/hr takes time. Often not the best use of time.

[pritch]

They should be concentrating on the absolutely abysmal general standard of driving on NZ roads rather than worrying about a couple or so kays over the limit. .

There are three main approaches to road safety: education, engineering, and enforcement. Two cost money, one rakes it in, guess where the emphasis goes?

Years ago BIKE did an article on causes of accidents in Britain, speed ranked seventh. I doubt anybody near the top of the NZ Police could tell you much about the six causes of accidents rated higher than speed. I'm sure there are people in the police who know, but it's possible nobody asks them.

At one time the head of the Special Tactics Group claimed to have served in the SAS. His claim was later proved to be bogus. To my knowledge there was at least one former SAS soldier serving in the police and likely more, (I know of another who served earlier) but for whatever reason he/they weren't in the STG.

[roogazza]

it was three AM and the driver on the wrong side 72 years old, i've no idea how long she'd been on the motorway and still not realised the armco was on the wrong side, so doubt keeping left wasn't very much in her mind. As for the motorcyclist, along there one would assume that he assumed the oncoming car was just an oncoming car, at 100km'h each way the moment he may have suddenly worked out it was on his patch of road would've meant very little time to react, if any,
bit of a freak accident really

Hell ,that might've been a closing speed of 200 kph , not many people have their brain geared for those speeds. Poor bugger on the bike and yes freaky !!!!!

[husaberg]

The biggest issue I've seen the roads in the last month is dangerous overtaking. Even trying to overtake a truck and trailer travelling (governed) at 90 km/hr at 104 km/hr takes time. Often not the best use of time.
You should talk to the truck driver he keeps to the speed limit and drives all day.
Puts up with having to brake when idiots pass him in stupid places like right at the end of passing lanes or blind corners.
A truck driver will generally indicate and let you through.
i have 10 subordinates all with company vehicles with tracking all the staff get to take them home at night.
interestingly The peak times for speeding are when they are running late to their first job of the day thats not because of traffic or roads its due to not leaving home early enough:clap:

[R650R]

Before we get on the road we are all made aware of the "rules of the game" via the driver licence process. Somewhere along the way our confidence evolves and we think we know better and start making our own rules. a lot of that time that works quite well.
But one day your driving to your own rules and another motorist misjudges your speed, your intentions, perhaps even driving to their own rules themselves. Now the margin for error is gone and we have a collision. Safety is about everyone being on the same page and being able to understand what others around you are going to do.
Yes speed isn't the be all and end all cause, but its a tool for the cops to see whose poking their head above the trenches and doing something different... And you only need to watch a few police reality shows to see those just going a little fast often have other issues or messed up ideas.

I work on a job site where the speed limit is only 20km/h with 120 tonne heavy machinery goverened to that speed. You'd think that's plenty of time for decision making but collisions and near misses still happen often due to work pressures and distractions etc And nearly all the operators are pretty top gun at their jobs and driving. So surely out there in the outside world with unknown average joe coming at you a 100k limit is a good idea???

Please speed if you want to, hell even I do on occasion and pay the price... but don't let yourself think you haven't encroached on your own safety margins and increased risk. If you don't accept that your not fully focused on the new risks that has bought into equation.

[Swoop]

Of course they were going to express offence, their policy of strict enforcement has been a complete failure.

The public should demand a change of tack here. Obviously targeting speed is an absolute failure.
Driver education.
Getting bad habits OUT of drivers (not using seatbelts, cellphone use, failure to keep left, failure to indicate and failure TO STOP AT A FUCKING STOP SIGN OR RED LIGHT!) would be a start.


The faster you go... It is not about speed causing the accident!
The faster you go, the sooner you get there.
You also get off the road sooner so reducing your exposure to harm on the roads.

There. We can both spout factual crap.


It isn't hard to understand.

I'll give you 3 choices
1 - high speed impact
2 - lower speed impact
3 - no impact.

I prefer #3 myself.
The best option, but one which the retards in power fail to comprehend.


Anyone taking bets on what the gubbinment's approach to THE CARNAGE!!! on the roads (shock, horror sex, probe! - more details on page 3 of today's news)?
I'm betting a rinse & repeat, and we all know how successful that is...:facepalm:

[buggerit]

The years road toll is a very blunt instrument if you want a true picture of general road safety

A few figures from MOT govt site:

light motor vehicles on road.

2000 2.5 million
2010 3.1 million
2017 3.8 million

km travelled by light vehicle fleet

2000 3.6 billion
2010 4.0 billion
2017 4.8 billion


So comparing total years road toll without taking anything else into consideration makes no sense.
MOT figures show year on year less deaths per km driven but I spose thst doesn't sell newspapers
or provide the govt with a stick to beat the motorists with.

[FJRider]

It isn't hard to understand.

I think more(some) effort should be put in to avoiding the impact, not just lessening the consequence of an impact. The main message about driving, in particular holiday period driving, focuses on speed and reducing it to lessen the death and mayhem "when" an impact happens?



The provisional figures for 2018 show fatalities are made up of the following demographics:

My thoughts and questions on these figures in brackets ...


49 per cent were the driver of the vehicle and 24 per cent were passengers. (Is it safer to be a passenger than a driver .. ??? )

14 per cent were motorbike riders or pillion passengers. (Less likely to die in a road accident maybe .. ???)

11 per cent were pedestrians. (Roads are not safe even for pedestrians-is this a speed issue.. ???)

Just over one per cent were cyclists. (NO license required. Enough said .. ???)

66 per cent were male and 34 per cent were female. (Not all men are dangerous ... only 66% are .. ???)

28 per cent were in the sixty-plus age group. (So ...oldies aren't the big issue after all .. ???)

14 per cent were children or teenagers. (The children may just be collateral damage on the road, but don't people think the kids you kill might be your own .. ??? teenagers ideas of right and wrong might need changing. ??? or am I just showing my age .. ???)

13 per cent were aged between 20 and 24 years. (Elderly children and teenagers ... 'nuff said)

48 per cent died in crashes on the open road on state highways. (Obviously ... 52% die in built up areas. Thus ... is speed really the issue in these areas or should urban speed limits simply be lowered .. ???)

The region with the largest share of fatalities was Waikato at 17 per cent; followed by Auckland and Canterbury with 14 per cent each; and Manawatu/Wanganui on 12 per cent. (Will the millions of $$$ on Waikato Motorways improve these figures .. ??? Nothing said about the safest region .. ??)

[AllanB]

Interesting stats and personal comments there thanks.

Stats are interesting. 11% of road deaths pedestrians - presumably a very high percentage of these deaths were in built up areas (as I fail to see a lot of pedestrians on the open road). Clearly the government need to have some type of ACC charge on walking within build up areas.


Do Lime scooter deaths count as road deaths?

[speedpro]

"49 per cent were the driver of the vehicle and 24 per cent were passengers. (Is it safer to be a passenger than a driver .. ??? )"

As somebody said - " Lies, damned lies, and statistics", or something like that.

The above, and the other stats in the original post are all completely meaningless without knowing other pertinent information. In this case, how many crashed vehicles even had a passenger? Obviously all the vehicles had a driver. If every vehicle also had a passenger then obviously it is safer to be in the passenger seat. Clearly not every crashed vehicle had a passenger, but other crashed vehicles had multiple passengers.
Given the relative numbers of cars and motorcycles the 14% for motorcyclists is a horror stat.
The numbers dying on the open road versus urban roads needs to be considered in conjunction with the % of vehicle distance traveled in the 2 environments. I would suggest that the vehicle fleet does a lot more distance in suburbia, simply by weight of numbers of vehicles being used in suburbia, versus the open road. Assuming that I'm not totally wrong on that then the open road 48% is pretty poor. Maybe open road speeds need to be lowered to be the same as urban roads.
The following post with "year on year less deaths per km driven" is pretty much what I was thinking but hadn't looked up the numbers.
Interesting numbers in both posts but the simplistic interpretation by those in authority is starting to annoy me, not to mention the mindless regurgitating of the various mantras, "speed kills" etc.

[speedpro]

There will of course be lots of hand wringing, something this government is very good at. Various officials will bless us with their disappointment and let us know how the message just isn't getting through, all supported by reference to the total road toll. There will of course be no mention of fleet distance traveled or other important and relevant information. A new improved road safety campaign will be rolled out in the new year, loosely based on targeting drivers doing slightly over the posted limit on long straight divided roads.

Possibly an Albert Einstein quote - "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”

This thread was originally from 2015(?). Started November 2014. Has there been any new initiatives aimed at the causes of the crashes since then? I mean proper long term ongoing serious initiatives.

[OddDuck]

Yep. Rinse and repeat.

In the meantime if you look at what's actually killing Kiwis in droves you realise how myopic the hysteria about the road toll really is. Yeah the road toll is a problem. There's no way it's as big a problem as people sitting on the couch in front of a screen while overeating. Or simply being lonely.

[Hugo Nougo]

Interesting numbers in both posts but the simplistic interpretation by those in authority is starting to annoy me, not to mention the mindless regurgitating of the various mantras, "speed kills" etc.

yup, weve all had this conversation before, this was posted a while back in another post and is as close to real usable stats that ive seen.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9277/rrcgb2011-04.pdf

no surprise that driver error is the consistent issue.

[speedpro]

From a story today:
"The Automobile Association's road safety spokesman, Dylan Thomsen, said its research had found about half of fatal crashes involved extreme and reckless behaviour; the rest tended to involve everyday drivers making mistakes or bad decisions."
Another death was an elderly gentleman single vehicle crash here in Auckland. I'm thinking medical event resulting in a crash. If so more of a medical issue that motor vehicle. If he had been sitting having a coffee would it have been reported as a coffee related death. This is another thing that winds me up - collecting scarcely related events and including them in stats. If i was to die of a heart attack while driving to work, unless I managed to safely park the car before passing away, I would be recorded as another statistic in the road toll.

[Scuba_Steve]

From a story today:
"The Automobile Association's road safety spokesman, Dylan Thomsen, said its research had found about half of fatal crashes involved extreme and reckless behaviour; the rest tended to involve everyday drivers making mistakes or bad decisions."
Another death was an elderly gentleman single vehicle crash here in Auckland. I'm thinking medical event resulting in a crash. If so more of a medical issue that motor vehicle. If he had been sitting having a coffee would it have been reported as a coffee related death. This is another thing that winds me up - collecting scarcely related events and including them in stats. If i was to die of a heart attack while driving to work, unless I managed to safely park the car before passing away, I would be recorded as another statistic in the road toll.

maybee not?
They do claim - "Medical events were not counted in the official figures, but death within 30 days of a crash would be included."

[Swoop]

So comparing total years road toll without taking anything else into consideration makes no sense... I spose thst doesn't sell newspapers
As the saying goes "if it bleeds, it leads"...


My thoughts and questions on these figures in brackets ...
Good post!
Something relevant that politicians (and media) should take into consideration.

Possibly an Albert Einstein quote - "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”
That defines the police approach rather succinctly...

[slofox]

So comparing total years road toll without taking anything else into consideration makes no sense.
MOT figures show year on year less deaths per km driven but I spose thst doesn't sell newspapers
or provide the govt with a stick to beat the motorists with.

I think you're right on there. Let's having something meaningful.

[pritch]

maybee not?
They do claim - "Medical events were not counted in the official figures, but death within 30 days of a crash would be included."

I think that means more realistically that medical events are just not considered at all.

[FJRider]

I think that means more realistically that medical events are just not considered at all.

Unless you count heart attacks as accidents. But that may be viewed differently if another vehicle is involved ... either to cause the heart attack ... as collateral damage during/after the heart attack ... or if the heart attack occurs as the result of the accident.

[pritch]

Unless you count heart attacks as accidents.

I don't, but suspect they do. Two incidents I can recall suggest that. There was a fatal single vehicle accident involving a solo rider on a BMW 650 in the Waikato. It was treated more as a mystery than a potential health event.

Last year there was a dual fatality head-on near here. Police said it was a mystery: straight road, daylight, fine weather. No mention of the ages of the female drivers, eighty something and ninety. My guess? A medical emergency for one driver coupled with target fixation on the part of the other. How that got recorded in the statistics though God knows.

[FJRider]

I don't, but suspect they do. Two incidents I can recall suggest that. There was a fatal single vehicle accident involving a solo rider on a BMW 650 in the Waikato. It was treated more as a mystery than a potential health event.

Last year there was a dual fatality head-on near here. Police said it was a mystery: straight road, daylight, fine weather. No mention of the ages of the female drivers, eighty something and ninety. My guess? A medical emergency for one driver coupled with target fixation on the part of the other. How that got recorded in the statistics though God knows.

Suspected cause verses proven cause.

Can't prove it ... didn't happen ... :shifty:

[pritch]

Suspected cause verses proven cause.

Can't prove it ... didn't happen ... :shifty:

In both of the instances I mentioned, short of autopsies all round, they remain unproven. But to record those as driver error or similar would be fiction.

Oh, and for a change, in neither case were speed or alcohol stated to be contributing factors. Which is in itself remarkable.

[Ulsterkiwi]

I am all for the multifaceted approach that safer journeys is supposed to promote. Safer roads, drivers/riders and vehicles. Only works if you work on all three.
Policing speed the way it is done here with the shifting “tolerance” bullshit will change nothing. The other issue is when a road is made safer that should allow policing effort to go on the relatively less safe roading.
Case to illustrate (not prove):
Kapiti Expressway. In the cage. Left hand lane. 105 indicated. Clear day. Dry road.
Absolute dunger of a car is overtaking me at a reasonable pace. No issue with their manoeuvre or actually being overtaken. Fill your boots mate.
I have been waiting for quite a while for a response from this driver as up ahead I have seen a patrol car sitting on the shoulder.
Guy finally sees it when we are maybe 3 seconds out, less than 100metres? absolutely stands on the brakes and falls back behind me but remains in right hand lane.
I continue at my existing speed.
After we leave patrol car behind, dunger gets back up to 115/120 (I am guessing) and passes me.
So my thoughts are:
What has been achieved? Driver in the speeding car has not adapted their behaviour at all. In fact because of their abject failure to look ahead he/she carried out a dangerous manoeuvre (sudden braking for no apparent reason other than avoiding a ticket)
Police officer was achieving little patrolling one of the (apparently) safest roads in the country. Why not go and spend some time where it’s less safe and “improve” things there? Catch some people doing actual dangerous shit?
I dunno, maybe someone can explain it to me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FJRider]

In both of the instances I mentioned, short of autopsies all round, they remain unproven. But to record those as driver error or similar would be fiction.



I have experience with family members involved in such cases ... cause of death listed as heart attack (confirmed by autopsy as required in cases of sudden death). Actual time of death unconfirmed (read not sure if ... prior to/during/or after the incident).

Listed as cause of the accident ... Medical event.

All parties involved escape the (possible) finger of blame (read escape further scrutiny).



And the world continues on ...

[slofox]

Incidentally, was there a reduction in speed tolerance this year? Coz if there was, I didn't know about it...:drool:

[Moi]

A letter to the New Zealand Herald, Thursday January 3, 2019:

Crash Barriers
Research over a period of 30 years has
proved beyond doubt that it's a waste of
time to try to make people drive better.
The only thing that is guaranteed to stop
cars crashing is median barriers and wide
shoulders.
The Auckland Council spent large
sums of money a year or two ago inviting
a Swedish specialist here to consult on
road safety. He said people will always
behave idiotically. That will never change
no matter how much money we spend
on driver education. The key is making
roads safer.
Perhaps with policies announced
recently we have some chance of at last
seeing something effective being done to
reduce the road toll. We should all be
grateful that funds are about to be put into
medians and shoulders.
Susan Grimsdell, Auckland Central.

I have not yet found the research to which Susan Grimsdell refers, though I wonder if she is thinking of this: Sweden model could reduce NZ road deaths - researcher (https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/343501/sweden-model-could-reduce-nz-road-deaths-researcher).

However, it is her first paragraph I find the most disturbing, absolute ambulance at the bottom of the cliff and leaving the blinkers on so I can't see anything different. If she is correct, can't find any research to support her position - perhaps someone on here might do better than me in finding it, then why are we bothering with RideForever or any other programme that improves the skills of riders and/or drivers?

[husaberg]

rs, though I wonder if she is thinking of this: Sweden model could reduce NZ road deaths - researcher (https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/343501/sweden-model-could-reduce-nz-road-deaths-researcher).

However, it is her first paragraph I find the most disturbing, absolute ambulance at the bottom of the cliff and leaving the blinkers on so I can't see anything different. If she is correct, can't find any research to support her position - perhaps someone on here might do better than me in finding it, then why are we bothering with RideForever or any other programme that improves the skills of riders and/or drivers?

Most people that die on motorbikes are as a result of car drivers mistakes so think of those courses as being practical defensive driving courses.ie survival skills
its the same with Car vs truck its generally not the trucks fault but car drivers who hit trucks generally die Yet with cars who hit bikes its the rider that normally dies.
Both are over represented in road deaths but its mostly not their fault.
As i said earlier speed is the easiest to police but when the cameras started out they were meant to be in black spot areas unfortunately they have never applied them like this.
Our company actively manage speed and aggressive driving with tracking, it works at lowering the accident rate plus as a side benefit saves fuel plus wear and tear on tyres and vehicles

[speedpro]

IIRC cameras were going to target the top 10% of speeders. Of course that is a reducing target and has been completely overlooked now.

[husaberg]

IIRC cameras were going to target the top 10% of speeders. Of course that is a reducing target and has been completely overlooked now.

i live a about 8-10bkM's out of town
Part of the road is really windy and narrow and a know spot for killing people over a patch of a few Km's
Never once has there been a speed camera on this piece of road.
They instead carry on to put speed cameras on the 70km in the town i live as its straight wide and easy to speed.
Whilst very lucrative it doesn't lower the speed on the dangerous section much.
they lowered the speed to 80 km and widened the road its better but still far from perfect.

That said, Supposedly seeing a police car or officer is a most effective speed control measure.
Japan used to set up fake policeman dummies and it seems to be spreading arround the world

340183340179340180340181340182

[Navy Boy]

I am all for the multifaceted approach that safer journeys is supposed to promote. Safer roads, drivers/riders and vehicles. Only works if you work on all three.
Policing speed the way it is done here with the shifting “tolerance” bullshit will change nothing. The other issue is when a road is made safer that should allow policing effort to go on the relatively less safe roading.
Case to illustrate (not prove):
Kapiti Expressway. In the cage. Left hand lane. 105 indicated. Clear day. Dry road.
Absolute dunger of a car is overtaking me at a reasonable pace. No issue with their manoeuvre or actually being overtaken. Fill your boots mate.
I have been waiting for quite a while for a response from this driver as up ahead I have seen a patrol car sitting on the shoulder.
Guy finally sees it when we are maybe 3 seconds out, less than 100metres? absolutely stands on the brakes and falls back behind me but remains in right hand lane.
I continue at my existing speed.
After we leave patrol car behind, dunger gets back up to 115/120 (I am guessing) and passes me.
So my thoughts are:
What has been achieved? Driver in the speeding car has not adapted their behaviour at all. In fact because of their abject failure to look ahead he/she carried out a dangerous manoeuvre (sudden braking for no apparent reason other than avoiding a ticket)
Police officer was achieving little patrolling one of the (apparently) safest roads in the country. Why not go and spend some time where it’s less safe and “improve” things there? Catch some people doing actual dangerous shit?
I dunno, maybe someone can explain it to me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sadly a typical reaction - You see it with fixed cameras (As well as mobile van cameras) all the time. I've a theory that cameras or cop cars positioned as such actually cause more harm than good for the reasons you've outlined above. Personally I'd love to see an unmarked police bike or two zapping people on their mobile devices. It'd be like shooting fish in a barrel in Wellington and Auckland. Then stick the footage on Facecloth/Instatwerp and get it into the public domain. Perhaps then a slightly more reasoned debate might result.


Down here on the mainland there are our fair share of dozy twerps around on the roads at the moment. Having said that I was out for a good few hours on the bike again today and saw plenty of patient and considerate driving with slower vehicles pulling over for us when it was safe to do so. I was really pleased to see this - There's hope people! :hug:

[AllanB]

The police are just recruiting wrong.

[scumdog]

Most people that die on motorbikes are as a result of car drivers mistakes



Thats the biggest biker myth ever.

21 years on the job and I know of two crashes in my area where the car driver was at fault (bikers not killed)

BUT off the top gf my head I know of at least five crashes (possibly more, memory not at full throttle!) I attended or was involved with where the biker was totally at fault. a couple hit cars the other ran off the road


And that's not counting the crashes where there was minor/no injury when a rider exceeded their capabilities

[speedpro]

What I would have thought as well given my own experiences and observations.

[husaberg]

Thats the biggest biker myth ever.

21 years on the job and I know of two crashes in my area where the car driver was at fault (bikers not killed)

BUT off the top gf my head I know of at least five crashes (possibly more, memory not at full throttle!) I attended or was involved with where the biker was totally at fault. a couple hit cars the other ran off the road


And that's not counting the crashes where there was minor/no injury when a rider exceeded their capabilities

i could have phrased it better but i was meaning car vs bike, accidents only resulting in death.
i will bow to your superior knowledge though

Although this suggests otherwise based on US crash stats.


Conducted by USC Professor Harry Hunt and initiated by the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, the Hurt Report identified answers to many questions that help shed light on who is usually at fault when these collisions occur.
All of the following information was found within the Hurt Report :
When motorcycles are involved in crashes with another vehicle(s), the other vehicle(s) is found to have violated the biker’s right-of-way and be at fault for the collision in more than 66% of those accidents.
https://www.motorcycleaccidentcaselaw.com/blog/cars-vs-motorcycles-when-collisions-occur-its-usually-the-fault-of-the/

In analyzing 10 years of Florida motorcycle crashes, Chanyoung Lee, a senior researcher at the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research, found that 60 percent of the time motorists in other vehicles are at fault when they collide with motorcycles.
"There's a bias by people driving," Lee said. "They don't expect to see motorcycles."
https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-2013-03-09-fl-finding-fault-in-motorcycle-crashes-20130309-story.html

okay this is intersting so i will go to ZNZ if we go to NZ stats produced by our MOT

A motorcyclist has the primary responsibility for 56 percent of fatal and injury crashes involving
motorcycles. For fatal and serious injury crashes, the motorcyclist is more likely to have the primary
responsibility4 for the crash. The motorcycle rider has the primary responsibility for 70 percent of fatal
motorcycle crashes, but the comparable figure for minor injury crashes is 51 percent.
In about two-thirds (64 percent) of the crashes that involve a collision with another vehicle, it is the
other vehicle that has the primary responsibility for the crash
https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/262ce6671f/Speed-2017.pdf
So its a toss up so overall deaths seem more likely riders fault, but of all acidents involving cars vs bikes accidents its far more likely car drivers fault.


Some intersting stuff.
https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/262ce6671f/Speed-2017.pdf
340211340212340213

[FJRider]

... Although this suggests otherwise based on US crash stats.

Stat's from the USA are relevant in the USA. But we are in NZ. Interesting to compare the two separate cultures involved ... but I wouldn't go as far as stating their stat's are relevant.


So its a toss up so overall deaths seem more likely riders fault, but of all acidents involving cars vs bikes accidents its far more likely car drivers fault.

If you choose to expect "Right of Way" when "The Law" requires you to get it ... be prepared for disappointment ... it's not always going to happen. If you do the macho "I have my rights" thing ... it will hurt. As I said ... not always ... but if you want to live ... that's the way to bet.

Fault becomes irrelevant when you're sliding down the road on your ass ...

[husaberg]

Stat's from the USA are relevant in the USA. But we are in NZ. Interesting to compare the two separate cultures involved ... but I wouldn't go as far as stating their stat's are relevant.



If you choose to expect "Right of Way" when "The Law" requires you to get it ... be prepared for disappointment ... it's not always going to happen. If you do the macho "I have my rights" thing ... it will hurt. As I said ... not always ... but if you want to live ... that's the way to bet.

Fault becomes irrelevant when you're sliding down the road on your ass ...

FJ the US stats say the same as the NZ ones do within 2%.US stats say 66% NZ says 64% of Accidents involving bikes and other vehicles are the fault of the other car driver.
Fault is relevant esp when they bang on about the Trucks and Bikes being so dangerous as they are so high in the stats when its the Car drivers negligence.

[pritch]

Thats the biggest biker myth ever.


True, it's caused by a misreading of the statistics. In most accidents involving a car and a bike the car is at fault. The majority of bike accidents though are single vehicle accidents so we can't blame a car. There was a recent thread that eventually arrived at the right answer.

[FJRider]

... Fault is relevant esp when they bang on about the Trucks and Bikes being so dangerous as they are so high in the stats when its the Car drivers negligence.

You mean car drivers stupidity ... Truckies are usually the ones driving within the law and THEIR speed limit. Try to tango with 40 tonnes plus ... it wont/can't end well ...

If you are seen to be giving way ... regardless of it being your responsibility to ... or not ... you cant be seen to be at fault. I give way to trucks too ... very healthy to ... I want to live longer.

I want to see a change in the motorcycle death statistics for next year ... (Give way and live) and at the very least ... and not be part of the statistics. Well ... not part of deaths or accident statistics anyway.

[husaberg]

You mean car drivers stupidity ... Truckies are usually the ones driving within the law and THEIR speed limit. Try to tango with 40 tonnes plus ... it wont/can't end well ...

If you are seen to be giving way ... regardless of it being your responsibility to ... or not ... you cant be seen to be at fault. I give way to trucks too ... very healthy to ... I want to live longer.

I want to see a change in the motorcycle death statistics for next year ... (Give way and live) and at the very least ... and not be part of the statistics. Well ... not part of deaths or accident statistics anyway.

FJ go back to what i wrote.


Most people that die on motorbikes are as a result of car drivers mistakes so think of those courses as being practical defensive driving courses.ie survival skills
its the same with Car vs truck its generally not the trucks fault but car drivers who hit trucks generally die Yet with cars who hit bikes its the rider that normally dies.
Both are over represented in road deaths but its mostly not their fault.
As i said earlier speed is the easiest to police but when the cameras started out they were meant to be in black spot areas unfortunately they have never applied them like this.
Our company actively manage speed and aggressive driving with tracking, it works at lowering the accident rate plus as a side benefit saves fuel plus wear and tear on tyres and vehicles
I should have wrote the first bit clearer but read the second sentences

[FJRider]

FJ go back to what i wrote.

Why ... it's Bullshit ... in my opinion anyway ... but you are entitled to your opinion. Even when you are wrong.

Look up motorcycle deaths in Vietnam. Compare there wit the great USA ... you might learn something ...

[husaberg]

Why ... it's Bullshit ... in my opinion anyway ... but you are entitled to your opinion. Even when you are wrong.

Look up motorcycle deaths in Vietnam. Compare there wit the great USA ... you might learn something ...

So the US stats are in your opinion bullshit and not relevant to NZ, okay..............Are the NZ stats in your opinion relevant to NZ because as i said they say the same thing
US stats

Conducted by USC Professor Harry Hunt a
When motorcycles are involved in crashes with another vehicle(s), the other vehicle(s) is found to have violated the biker’s right-of-way and be at fault for the collision in more than 66% of those accidents.

NZ stats

Bikes VS car (64 percent) of the crashes that involve a collision with another vehicle, it is the other vehicle that has the primary responsibility for the crash
they say the same thing with 2%
ps i said go back to what i wrote as you appear to be misrepresenting what i said about trucks

[FJRider]

So the NZ stats are in your opinion bullshit and not relevant to NZ, okay..............
ps i said go back to what i wrote as you appear to be misrepresenting what i said about trucks

Definition of statistics ...

the practice or science of collecting and analysing numerical data in large quantities, especially for the purpose of inferring proportions in a whole from those in a representative sample.

https://www.google.com/search?q=definition+of+statistics&rlz=1C1CHBF_enNZ810NZ810&oq=definition+of+statistics&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.19806j1j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Or ... Alternative ideas

: Statistics means never having to say you're certain.

: Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.

: He uses statistics like a drunken man uses a lamp post, more for support than illumination.

Say you were standing with one foot in the oven and one foot in an ice bucket. According to the percentage people, you should be perfectly comfortable.

: If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.

My personal favorite ... worth thinking about ...

To find out what happens when you change something, it is necessary to change it.


Perhaps ... to change the stat's ... changes need to be made. What needs to be changed first ... behavior or attitude's ... ???

[husaberg]

Definition of statistics ...

t

That cool but seeing as you have no actual basis to form your opinion that the accident stats in both NZ and the USA are wrong, whatever else you say is an opinion based on it seems solely your own opinion.
Also considering you dont actually read what i wrote before you claim to disagree with it, i would not say your opinion is that sound.

[FJRider]

That cool but seeing as you have no actual basis to form your opinion that the accident stats in both NZ and the USA are wrong, whatever else you say is an opinion based on it seems solely your own opinion.
Also considering you dont actually read what i wrote before you claim to disagree with it, i would not say your opinion is that sound.

Statistics are coincidences that have happened in the past. The one thing people learn from statistics is ... people don't and wont learn.

[husaberg]

Statistics are coincidences that have happened in the past. The one thing people learn from statistics is ... people don't and wont learn.

Well as you are not able to see what may be in your future by looking back i suggest you remove your rear view mirrors then.:brick:
A fool and his money are soon parted but a fool and his opinion stay together their whole life.

[Trade_nancy]

You mean car drivers stupidity ... Truckies are usually the ones driving within the law and THEIR speed limit. Try to tango with 40 tonnes plus ... it wont/can't end well ...

If you are seen to be giving way ... regardless of it being your responsibility to ... or not ... you cant be seen to be at fault. I give way to trucks too ... very healthy to ... I want to live longer.

I want to see a change in the motorcycle death statistics for next year ... (Give way and live) and at the very least ... and not be part of the statistics. Well ... not part of deaths or accident statistics anyway.

And be talking on a cellphone like a lot of them as they turn their truck and trailers through a busy intersection...

[FJRider]

And be talking on a cellphone like a lot of them as they turn their truck and trailers through a busy intersection...

Why did you think I give way to them ... ??? :killingme

[Vinz0r]

So (a) how many have got tickets for 1kph over the speed limit?

And (b) does not a lower speed at time of impact not ( generally) result in less damage to all concerned?

Of course it does, but I think the argument is that there are better ways to reduce the road toll than a strong focus on strict enforcement of the speed limit.

[FJRider]

Well as you are not able to see what may be in your future by looking back i suggest you remove your rear view mirrors then.:brick:
A fool and his money are soon parted but a fool and his opinion stay together their whole life.

Perhaps ... I prefer my own interpretation on what happened. Not another's interpretation on how it could be explained.

Rear view mirrors are for pussies ... what is behind is NOT important. It is what is AHEAD that will be of more danger to you.

Hint ... what is ahead is future. Behind is history. Don't let history catch up ...

[FJRider]

Of course it does, but I think the argument is that there are better ways to reduce the road toll than a strong focus on strict enforcement of the speed limit.

So ... fitting better brakes to slow you more ... is NOT the solution ... who would have thunk that ... :whistle:

[husaberg]

Perhaps ... I prefer my own interpretation on what happened. Not another's interpretation on how it could be explained.

Rear view mirrors are for pussies ... what is behind is NOT important. It is what is AHEAD that will be of more danger to you.

Hint ... what is ahead is future. Behind is history. Don't let history catch up ...

Yeah but its apparent your own opinion is not correct.

[FJRider]

That cool but seeing as you have no actual basis to form your opinion that the accident stats in both NZ and the USA are wrong, whatever else you say is an opinion based on it seems solely your own opinion.
Also considering you dont actually read what i wrote before you claim to disagree with it, i would not say your opinion is that sound.

Did I say they were wrong ... ??? Statistics are facts ... stated along with other facts to make (and PROVE) a point. To reinforce a theory even.

IF ... statistics show there are more accidents at intersections controlled by a Give Way sign ... than a Stop sign ... would you AVOID Give Way signs (because they are dangerous) ... or would you just take more care at Give Way sign controlled intersections ... ??

QUESTION ... Why do so many people die on Waikato roads .. ??? BAD roads or people making BAD/STUPID decisions ... ??? How many millions of $$$ will it take to remove stupidity from the Road safety Equation ... ??? Did why people died on these roads LAST year ... make any difference to those that died on those roads THIS year ... ???

Statistics are NUMBERS ... and can those numbers be changed .. ?? Make a difference on the roads of NZ ... CHANGE next years statistics ... and make the right decisions. It wont be the easiest way, or the cheapest ... BUT ... it might just happen to you. YOU ... might hope you are exempt from the statistics ... lets see what next years statistics show. As long as your name isn't one of the deaths listed ... BOTH of us will be happy.

Another question ... HOW has statistics changed the way YOU ride your motorcycle (or car) on the roads of New Zealand in the past year ... ??? GREEN bling to those that come up with a (believable) reply ...

[FJRider]

Yeah but its apparent your own opinion is not correct.

In YOUR opinion ... you mean ... ;)

Do you have statistics to show it's NOT correct ... ??

[Murray]

Rear view mirrors are for pussies ... what is behind is NOT important.

What a stupid thing to say!

[AllanB]

Another question ... HOW has statistics changed the way YOU ride your motorcycle (or car) on the roads of New Zealand in the past year ... ??? GREEN bling to those that come up with a (believable) reply ...


Hmmmmm that's a good point.

Did the high number of MC deaths last year make me change my riding? I'm saying 'NO' .

However a number of threads over 2018 on KB about riding distances, remembering to look well head, and not getting caught up in the 'rush' of the ride made me think to the point I made some changes for the better.

[husaberg]

In YOUR opinion ... you mean ... ;)

Do you have statistics to show it's NOT correct ... ??

I have already posted them. You refused to read them stating your opinion was correct

[FJRider]

What a stupid thing to say!

YOUR opinion ... but I got your attention.

Stupid choices and decisions KILL people. How many could die because of my (that) post ... ???

[FJRider]

Hmmmmm that's a good point.

Did the high number of MC deaths last year make me change my riding? I'm saying 'NO' .

However a number of threads over 2018 on KB about riding distances, remembering to look well head, and not getting caught up in the 'rush' of the ride made me think to the point I made some changes for the better.

Apparently ... I must spread ... etc.

Anybody else think the same ... ??

[FJRider]

I have already posted them. You refused to read them stating your opinion was correct

I never stated my opinion was correct ... just stated I believed your opinion was just that. Your's ...

[nzspokes]

YOUR opinion ... but I got your attention.

Stupid choices and decisions KILL people. How many could die because of my (that) post ... ???

Bullshit. Danger comes from behind. You have some control of what's in front of you but none from the back.

[nzspokes]

Most people that die on motorbikes are as a result of car drivers mistakes so think of those courses as being practical defensive driving courses.ie survival skills


Wrong, about 60% of riders do it to themselves.

[FJRider]

Bullshit. Danger comes from behind. You have some control of what's in front of you but none from the back.

If you have NO control of whats at your back ... having mirrors is pointless ... right .. ??? :devil2:

[FJRider]

I have already posted them. You refused to read them stating your opinion was correct

If it's any consolation ... I did read them.

Gave me a laugh ... thank you ... :lol:

[nzspokes]

If you have NO control of whats at your back ... having mirrors is pointless ... right .. ??? :devil2:

Now that depends how advanced your riding is.

When did you last do a course?

[FJRider]

I have already posted them. You refused to read them stating your opinion was correct

Perhaps you need more convincing statistics ... one's that were not compiled to confirm a set agenda ... by set organisations ... ;)

And ... please tell me how those statistics you posted/quoted ... CHANGED your riding style/habits ... or what changes you will make in light of those statistics ... :whistle:

[russd7]

Hmmmmm that's a good point.

Did the high number of MC deaths last year make me change my riding? I'm saying 'NO' .

However a number of threads over 2018 on KB about riding distances, remembering to look well head, and not getting caught up in the 'rush' of the ride made me think to the point I made some changes for the better.

so therefor the high rate of death did have an impact simply because these discussions were/are had because of those deaths.

if everything was cruising along without anything negative happening then these conversations would not be happening and you would not have deliberately changed your habits.

just a thought

[Murray]

If you have NO control of whats at your back ... having mirrors is pointless ... right .. ??? :devil2:

Another stupid comment. I assume from your comments you never look in your mirrors when changing lanes or passing? What a dick. Maybe cars should have no mirrors too. What a twat

[FJRider]

Now that depends how advanced your riding is.

When did you last do a course?

For what it's worth ... I do have mirrors ... and I do use them. Use of your mirrors has nothing to do with how "Advanced" your riding is ... stupid decisions are made if you don't have good information. Sometimes ... to control the vehicles behind ... you let them in front. Easier to watch too ...

I ask stupid questions to get reply's ... but YOUR actions depend on you getting information. Rear mirrors do provide information. Ignore them at your peril.

If you are of the opinion ... one's riding ability is based on the number of courses you've done ... good for you. Are you hoping you've done more than me ... ???

[husaberg]

Wrong, about 60% of riders do it to themselves.

Close in all accident including single vehicle accidents it 53% is but when its multi vehicles its only 34%.

[FJRider]

Another stupid comment. I assume from your comments you never look in your mirrors when changing lanes or passing? What a dick. Maybe cars should have no mirrors too. What a twat

I got another reply from you ... ;) No comments other than the personal ... I guess you're one of those sort.

And it may surprise you to know ... most cars have more than one mirror. But the drivers only (usually) use one. Guess which one ... ??

And stop believing every post you read is fact. (even mine .. :innocent:)