Road toll - Police stupid obsession blaming speed

[GrayWolf]

Wow your brain works in weird & funny ways
Again money does NOT make people better drivers in any way shape or form
Again financial penalty does NOT make people better drivers in any way shape or form
Making vehicles more dangerous however may make people better drivers through necessity (there are studies to suggest this)
And why do you think large insurance companies making shitloads of money would let Govts (of which alot of them probably have vested financial interest) get rid of their cash cow?

Having driven/rode in the UK for the first 16+ yrs as a driver, I lived with compulsory insurance. I know there have been many changes in car classification since I moved here, but! Finance does have a dramatic effect for vehicle type. Like most of my age group I learned to drive in an old 1960's car {in my case a Triumph Herald 1200cc} I was in my mid 20's at the time. What compulsory DOES do is highly discourage {prices them off the market} young/inexperienced drivers buying powerful cars. There's a 'stepped' licence system for motorcycles in Europe now, and I don't consider it a bad thing, and would even not consider it a bad move for owning powerful cars as well.

However Rastus IS right, although a criminal offence in the UK, any law does need 'teeth' like confiscation and crushing. My BIGGEST concern about it is, it will/would open the doorway even further for introducing fixed ANPR camera's around the country.

[Akzle]

Is it this one in the Tron?

Mmmmmm. Pants. (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/98467514/hamilton-boys-high-school-student-injured-in-girls-undie-prank)

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/a3/a387d32363871b9bcd3ce3874830da7f743e1a5ae6d40b3a86 a17ad0239c88a4.jpg

[Akzle]

. My BIGGEST concern about it is, it will/would open the doorway even further for introducing fixed ANPR camera's around the country.

...and license plates on the front of bikes <_<

[Navy Boy]

Having driven/rode in the UK for the first 16+ yrs as a driver, I lived with compulsory insurance. I know there have been many changes in car classification since I moved here, but! Finance does have a dramatic effect for vehicle type. Like most of my age group I learned to drive in an old 1960's car {in my case a Triumph Herald 1200cc} I was in my mid 20's at the time. What compulsory DOES do is highly discourage {prices them off the market} young/inexperienced drivers buying powerful cars. There's a 'stepped' licence system for motorcycles in Europe now, and I don't consider it a bad thing, and would even not consider it a bad move for owning powerful cars as well.

However Rastus IS right, although a criminal offence in the UK, any law does need 'teeth' like confiscation and crushing. My BIGGEST concern about it is, it will/would open the doorway even further for introducing fixed ANPR camera's around the country.

It's something of a circular argument this one. Having spent years riding and driving in the UK I agree that the higher costs, whether they be for insurance, rego costs or anything else motoring-related are effective at keeping younger/inexperienced drivers out of vehicles that could possibly be too much for them to handle effectively on the road.

However the accompanying increase in surveillance that this brings, if you doubt this sentiment then simply take a look at the UK for proof, is a price not worth paying IMHO. In a similar vein one simply has to look at the rise in numbers of static speed cameras in the UK since the mid 1990s which has been accompanied by a sharp decrease in the number of traffic-dedicated police. Cameras are good for prosecution figures, just not quite so good at catching the plonker travelling at 5 Km/hr below the limit babbling away on their mobile whilst high on drugs, be they legal or otherwise...

Additionally the UK has repeatedly seen a rise in the number of unlicenced and uninsured drivers as they are simply more inclined to take the chance owing to the prohibitive nature of the costs involved.

I've yet to see the road toll figures which came about over the recent holiday period and how they trended. I suspect the numbers were lower as the media hasn't taken much interest in them...

As ever with such things it's a complicated beast which will garner 7 different solutions if you were to ask 6 different people.

[Scuba_Steve]

I've yet to see the road toll figures which came about over the recent holiday period and how they trended. I suspect the numbers were lower as the media hasn't taken much interest in them...

Na things get delayed/silenced when they're higher usually as it's harder to walk round beating your chest & claiming others work as your own when the toll is higher
2017 labour weekend toll - 5
2016 labour weekend toll - 3

NZTA Page Here (http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/roadtoll/holidayroadtolllabourweekend/)

[caspernz]

It's something of a circular argument this one.

Additionally the UK has repeatedly seen a rise in the number of unlicenced and uninsured drivers as they are simply more inclined to take the chance owing to the prohibitive nature of the costs involved.

I've yet to see the road toll figures which came about over the recent holiday period and how they trended. I suspect the numbers were lower as the media hasn't taken much interest in them...

As ever with such things it's a complicated beast which will garner 7 different solutions if you were to ask 6 different people.

That's more or less the same observation as I've made, as no doubt many European ex-pats have. Make insurance compulsory, lower enforcement standards and nett result is similar to what we have in NZ. Unlicensed drivers in uninsured/unregistered cars. Is this where the bulk of road trauma originates from? My educated guess is no, although there will always be high profile examples of exactly that.

The lowering of the average rider/driver standard bugs me more.

But hey, we're both taking as much action on that as is possible on a personal level, wishing/hoping officialdom will catch up :violin::rolleyes:

[Akzle]

At last someone who can see merit in higher financial penalties/insuranace to improve safety. I think all those on here who do not want to see increased penalties are just frightened of being found at fault and having to face higher ACC premiums/fines themselves.

you're a fuckwit

[Akzle]

Having spent years riding and driving in the UK I agree that the higher costs, whether they be for insurance, rego costs or anything else motoring-related are effective at keeping younger/inexperienced drivers out of vehicles that could possibly be too much for them to handle effectively on the road.

see, i think that's some horseshit. as with anything else in life, you acquire the skills to do shit effectively. displacement and HP are irrelevant, really.
I know 12 year olds i'd trust to drive my drunk ass home in a 6 litre v8,
and every time in auckland, i cringe that somehow these fuckwits have obtained a licence but I wouldn't trust them with my lawnmower, let alone the fucking 1.6lt turbo SUV wankfuck that they have "cos safety"
just have a look within 200kms of any town, they're lowering the speed limits - because these fuckwits take their traffic on holiday, and still drive into each other! and that's fuckall to do with youth. though obviously lacking the education/experience to handle their shit effectively <_<

[Akzle]

The lowering of the average rider/driver standard bugs me more.

But hey, we're both taking as much action on that as is possible on a personal level, wishing/hoping officialdom will catch up :violin::rolleyes:

vote akzle

[awayatc]

blah blah blah.......


You are a fuckwit



Have to agree with Akzle on this one

[pritch]

So calling people who have ideas to improve road safety fuckwits makes you think you are brighter than them but all it does is demonstrate what a fuckwit you actually are yourself.

Umm dunno. If we're having a vote to see who is elected fuckwit I'm not voting awayatc. I'm voting Cassina.

[george formby]

So calling people who have ideas to improve road safety fuckwits makes you think you are brighter than them but all it does is demonstrate what a fuckwit you actually are yourself.

No. Axle is a cock womble. You are a paid up, bona fide, card carrying, fuckwit. Big difference. Vast!

It's not the dangerous amoebic drivel you post, it's the undertone that you treat our road safety as a puzzle to be solved rather than a situation to improve. Subscription to that mag with a chick on the front holding a crossword puzzle?

If, somehow, it was possible for you to understand that legislation and financial penalty is not being effective in road safety, you would start advocating the death penalty.

S.Troll on.

[george formby]

Maybe if fines etc were higher they would be effective. It is often said with respect to driving talking on a cellphone (as an example) that the fine needs to be higher for it to be effective as it is ignored by quite a few. Maybe if you were hit by a driver taliking on a cell phone you would think differently about not wanting higher fines/ACC premiums for those at fault. The alternative to any legislation not making life tougher for those found at fault is to just buy a vehicle to give us better protection when muppets screwup which means ditching our bikes.

You are another clueless fuckwit who calls others fuckwits rather than offer a solution yourself no doubt out of fear of others on here calling you a fuckwit too.

Their is more than one alternative. YaaF

[Kickaha]

Maybe if fines etc were higher they would be effective.
They have been, they weren't

[Drew]

Since when have traffic offense fines come down?

The fine for no rego has come down.

Speeding fines have gone up and down over the years.

You are a fuckwit.

You're the type of cunt who becomes president of a home owners body corporate. Only a true fuckwit would want that job, and you'd be all over it to impose your will on others.

Cunt!

[Kickaha]

Having no rego is hardley a safety offense though? Maybe it will take a crash through the fault of someone else before you grow a brain and decide penalties need to be tougher. You are the fuckwit. I note a few weeks back myself and others proved this point when you said the safest position on the road was to in effect "centre line hug"

Speeding fines came down quite some time ago

[Woodman]

Having no rego is hardley a safety offense though? Maybe it will take a crash through the fault of someone else before you grow a brain and decide penalties need to be tougher. You are the fuckwit. I note a few weeks back myself and others proved this point when you said the safest position on the road was to in effect "centre line hug"

How is a higher penalty going to stop someone making a mistake? We have all done it. Or will we all say to ourselves "today I won't have an accident because the fines are higher"

You are a fuckwit.

[caseye]

9! People dead on our roads in 2 days. OK two were train bait in Papakura, I smell drugs and apathy here.
Others were multiple vehicle prangs, speed not necessarily the cause.
Most likely the usual, an inability to properly pilot a vehicle around a bend or for that matter along a straight stretch without having a lapse in concentration. In other words, typical NZ Standard driver behaviour.
Until we actually teach people to be able to control an out of control vehicle(Not touted as the complete answer, by the way, BITCH!) they'll always fall off the road or worse into another vehicle without any thought as to how to avoid it in the frist place.
Driver education? Na!
Driver actual practical instruction and testing on same. Oh Yeah!

[scumdog]

Since when have traffic offense fines come down?

Look at what the fine for breaching Learner licence used to be...

[Woodman]

Modern cars require far more concertration to drive than older ones as the electric power steering on all but the most expensive is so light. The addition of LCD screens does not help improve concentration and I remember years ago it was illegal to have any screen fitted to a car that could be seen by the driver. Other than that they do look cool I guess and its perhaps the cool factor that sells cars more than the safety factor. I would rather have a big motor than a cool looking LCD screen.

Modern cars take more concentration to drive??????? Seriously have you ever driven a car with abs, traction and/or stability control, fuck or even an automatic? Electric power steering:facepalm:

Fuckwit.

[Woodman]

No you are the fuckwit as only the rich and thick would not see the risk of a speeding fine not constraining what speed they get up to. Maybe you are just a thick or rich fuckwit to think the way you do.

Fuck you have issues..................:baby::baby:

[Graystone]

No you are the fuckwit as only the rich and thick would not see the risk of a speeding fine not constraining what speed they get up to. Maybe you are just a thick or rich fuckwit to think the way you do.

Contrary to moronic belief, there is a hell of a lot more to the road toll than speeding incidences. Last figures I saw had speeding (as a singular offense) responsible for far less than 15% of fatalities.

[riffer]

There's a pretty simple reason that TPTB concentrate on velocity in attempting to reduce the casualty rate on the road, and I fear that a lot of people have such a negative understanding of it due to the simplicity of the campaign.

You see, there's two different types of people in this world:

those that are too hick to understand anything that has anything to do with math; and
those that turn off because they dislike being treated like idiots.


I'd put myself in the latter category.

And since most of the people here are also in the latter category, I'll talk about how it's been explained to me. Any type 1s can just move on here as there will be some maths.

You see, it's all about overall reduction of speed causing overall reduction of harm.

If look at any type of crash, anything that carries mass is going to have a significant amount of kinetic energy. And as we know the formula for kinetic energy tells us that the kinetic energy is half the mass times the velocity squared, or

K.E = m/2 * v^2

So how does that work in principle?

well, if we consider for argument's sake that a rider in leathers, kitted up weighs 100kg, and the bike weighs 200kg, and the bike and rider is doing 100kms/hour, then the kinetic energy is 300,000 joules. A rider that weighs 110kgs on that bike will have a kinetic energy of 310,000 joules.

But, if we increase the speed by 10km/hour, then the original 100kg rider will have a kinetic energy of 363,000 joules. So an increase of 10km/hr has an increase of 21% in kinetic energy. But an increase of 10% in weight has an increase of only 9% in kinetic energy.

And what's kinetic energy? Well its the force that gonna fuck you up in you hit something. It breaks bones, it tears tendons, and it wrecks bodies.

But there's a lot of thick people out there. And we know that a small increase in speed causes a disproportionate increase in the energy expressed in a crash. But that means nothing to thick people, so they've dumbed it down - The Higher the Speed, The Bigger The Damage. It's true, but not many understand why it is.

I really didn't give a fuck about the message. I'd been riding 38 years, and riding litre bikes for about 14 years straight, without a major accident.

Until the evening of September 11, 2017, when a blind idiot in a Nissan Navara Ute pulled directly into my path on SH58 (Plimmerton-Haywards-Hutt Highway) from a side track hidden by overgrown bushes, saw me, and froze. Directly into the path of me and my Aprilia RSV. And I was at the speed limit (I think - I wasn't looking a the speedo so I guess it was about that speed. It was the normal speed I do there, which is about 95-99).

I can remember hearing the voices of my riding instructor in our emergency braking practice yelling at me to "brake harder, harder, you can brake harder than that Simon!" And believe, me I scrubbed off as much speed as I could.

But it wasn't enough. They estimate I hit the ute at approximately 65km/hr, was propelled four metres up and six metres forward, somersaulted twice, and landed in a heap, unconscious. I've gotten this information from witnesses subsequent to the accident. I woke up in the ambulance, spent three weeks in the hospital, and I'm still on ACC now. Broken bones and a brachial plexus injury that has my right arm partially paralysed.

The Police officer, the ambulance officer, my surgeons, my OTs, my nurses and countless other people I've talked to have told me how lucky I am - how most people don't survive these accidents.

Apparently had I been doing as little as 10kms over the speed limit when the accident occurred, I would not have survived. 5kms over the limit I would have permanently lost the use of my arm, and had significantly more broken bones.

So, I've spent the last eight weeks thinking about speed in terms of kinetic energy. And as a result, I've come to understand where these guys are coming from. Because I've had it explained to me. And there's some problems with a differing rate of velocity to what the majority of other vehicles are doing. As most other road users are travelling at an expected speed those at a different speed, be it higher or lower, cause difficulty in the brains of the other road users as they are an unexpected occurrence. They will assume vehicles are travelling at certain speeds and pull out, or in front of people, and this could catch you out. Another problem is that, if things do go wrong, and they do, it increases the likelihood of you getting hurt. Any impact straight into a solid object in excess of 80km/hr is invariably fatal. And if it's not, recovery time is long.

I won't be able to ride again for 18-24 months. I'm not sure how I'll feel about exceeding the speed limit then. I imagine I'll probably be unable to resist the feel of the big bikes. But I will be doing so now with the realisation of how much it hurts when you hit something, and how long it takes to come back afterwards. At 50, let me tell you, it isn't as easy to recover as it was when I was 18.

Fire away with the hate if you like. Or engage positively. Either way, you can't ignore, or change, physics.

[riffer]

Contrary to moronic belief, there is a hell of a lot more to the road toll than speeding incidences. Last figures I saw had speeding (as a singular offense) responsible for far less than 15% of fatalities.

It's not just the deaths buddy. Orthapedic wards are full of bikers who didn't die, but who have a long time getting better. And mums with kids wondering how the fuck the family are gonna survive on 80% of their income for months and months.

[Drew]

Having no rego is hardley a safety offense though? Maybe it will take a crash through the fault of someone else before you grow a brain and decide penalties need to be tougher. You are the fuckwit. I note a few weeks back myself and others proved this point when you said the safest position on the road was to in effect "centre line hug"

I'm going to say this once you thick cunt.

Penalties for not dying are NEVER GOING TO STOP PEOPLE WHO DON'T DIE FROM DRIVING POORLY.

[Drew]

There's a pretty simple reason that TPTB concentrate on velocity in attempting to reduce the casualty rate on the road, and I fear that a lot of people have such a negative understanding of it due to the simplicity of the campaign.

You see, there's two different types of people in this world:

those that are too hick to understand anything that has anything to do with math; and
those that turn off because they dislike being treated like idiots.


I'd put myself in the latter category.

And since most of the people here are also in the latter category, I'll talk about how it's been explained to me. Any type 1s can just move on here as there will be some maths.

You see, it's all about overall reduction of speed causing overall reduction of harm.

If look at any type of crash, anything that carries mass is going to have a significant amount of kinetic energy. And as we know the formula for kinetic energy tells us that the kinetic energy is half the mass times the velocity squared, or

K.E = m/2 * v^2

So how does that work in principle?

well, if we consider for argument's sake that a rider in leathers, kitted up weighs 100kg, and the bike weighs 200kg, and the bike and rider is doing 100kms/hour, then the kinetic energy is 300,000 joules. A rider that weighs 110kgs on that bike will have a kinetic energy of 310,000 joules.

But, if we increase the speed by 10km/hour, then the original 100kg rider will have a kinetic energy of 363,000 joules. So an increase of 10km/hr has an increase of 21% in kinetic energy. But an increase of 10% in weight has an increase of only 9% in kinetic energy.

And what's kinetic energy? Well its the force that gonna fuck you up in you hit something. It breaks bones, it tears tendons, and it wrecks bodies.

But there's a lot of thick people out there. And we know that a small increase in speed causes a disproportionate increase in the energy expressed in a crash. But that means nothing to thick people, so they've dumbed it down - The Higher the Speed, The Bigger The Damage. It's true, but not many understand why it is.

I really didn't give a fuck about the message. I'd been riding 38 years, and riding litre bikes for about 14 years straight, without a major accident.

Until the evening of September 11, 2017, when a blind idiot in a Nissan Navara Ute pulled directly into my path on SH58 (Plimmerton-Haywards-Hutt Highway) from a side track hidden by overgrown bushes, saw me, and froze. Directly into the path of me and my Aprilia RSV. And I was at the speed limit (I think - I wasn't looking a the speedo so I guess it was about that speed. It was the normal speed I do there, which is about 95-99).

I can remember hearing the voices of my riding instructor in our emergency braking practice yelling at me to "brake harder, harder, you can brake harder than that Simon!" And believe, me I scrubbed off as much speed as I could.

But it wasn't enough. They estimate I hit the ute at approximately 65km/hr, was propelled four metres up and six metres forward, somersaulted twice, and landed in a heap, unconscious. I've gotten this information from witnesses subsequent to the accident. I woke up in the ambulance, spent three weeks in the hospital, and I'm still on ACC now. Broken bones and a brachial plexus injury that has my right arm partially paralysed.

The Police officer, the ambulance officer, my surgeons, my OTs, my nurses and countless other people I've talked to have told me how lucky I am - how most people don't survive these accidents.

Apparently had I been doing as little as 10kms over the speed limit when the accident occurred, I would not have survived. 5kms over the limit I would have permanently lost the use of my arm, and had significantly more broken bones.

So, I've spent the last eight weeks thinking about speed in terms of kinetic energy. And as a result, I've come to understand where these guys are coming from. Because I've had it explained to me. And there's some problems with a differing rate of velocity to what the majority of other vehicles are doing. As most other road users are travelling at an expected speed those at a different speed, be it higher or lower, cause difficulty in the brains of the other road users as they are an unexpected occurrence. They will assume vehicles are travelling at certain speeds and pull out, or in front of people, and this could catch you out. Another problem is that, if things do go wrong, and they do, it increases the likelihood of you getting hurt. Any impact straight into a solid object in excess of 80km/hr is invariably fatal. And if it's not, recovery time is long.

I won't be able to ride again for 18-24 months. I'm not sure how I'll feel about exceeding the speed limit then. I imagine I'll probably be unable to resist the feel of the big bikes. But I will be doing so now with the realisation of how much it hurts when you hit something, and how long it takes to come back afterwards. At 50, let me tell you, it isn't as easy to recover as it was when I was 18.

Fire away with the hate if you like. Or engage positively. Either way, you can't ignore, or change, physics.


Fuck up Simon. You're part of the fucking problem by piss poorly representing motorcyclists, in that you aren't pushing for every license holder to face mandatory training (we need to import trainers) or have the license taken off them.

Jesus titty fucking Christ. I KNOW you would be a body Corp president.

[riffer]

Fuck up Simon. You're part of the fucking problem by piss poorly representing motorcyclists, in that you aren't pushing for every license holder to face mandatory training (we need to import trainers) or have the license taken off them.

Jesus titty fucking Christ. I KNOW you would be a body Corp president.


Fuck off back. You're a fool if you don't train up as much as you can in anything you want to do well. But making it compulsory is not the idea. Then you'll end up with a bunch of non licensed riders and motorcycles will get banned.

No way I'd be a body corp president.

[Akzle]

If that is the case maybe thats the reason for the higher number of deaths on the road. I bet they would stay down for long then.
you're a fuckwit

Modern cars require far more concertration to drive than older ones as the electric power steering on all but the most expensive is so light. The addition of LCD screens does not help improve concentration and I remember years ago it was illegal to have any screen fitted to a car that could be seen by the driver. Other than that they do look cool I guess and its perhaps the cool factor that sells cars more than the safety factor. I would rather have a big motor than a cool looking LCD screen.
you're a fuckwit

No you are the fuckwit as only the rich and thick would not see the risk of a speeding fine not constraining what speed they get up to. Maybe you are just a thick or rich fuckwit to think the way you do.
you're a fuckwit

[Drew]

Having no rego is hardley a safety offense though? Maybe it will take a crash through the fault of someone else before you grow a brain and decide penalties need to be tougher. You are the fuckwit. I note a few weeks back myself and others proved this point when you said the safest position on the road was to in effect "centre line hug"
Oh yeah.

The BEST PLACE TO POSITION YOUR BIKE IS THE RIGHT TYRE TRACK.

I never said you need to always be there. It's a STARTING POSITION that offers the most options for escape.

Are you Skidmark?

Serious question. You're special needs cunt, never ever give advice again, you are an waste of oxygen.

[Akzle]

or

K.E = m/2 * v^2

So how does that work in principle?

well, if we consider for argument's sake that a rider in leathers, kitted up weighs 100kg, and the bike weighs 200kg, and the bike and rider is doing 100kms/hour, then the kinetic energy is 300,000 joules. A rider that weighs 110kgs on that bike will have a kinetic energy of 310,000 joules.
.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joules

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtons

[Drew]

Fuck off back. You're a fool if you don't train up as much as you can in anything you want to do well. But making it compulsory is not the idea. Then you'll end up with a bunch of non licensed riders and motorcycles will get banned.

No way I'd be a body corp president.


Yeah, and those riders that refuse can be dealt with and will eventually be eradicated for all intents and purposes.


Look to Germany and what is required to be a license holder.

Till you half arse fucking pussies actually have something that will make a difference that vast, eat a bag of clocks ya fat cunt.

[riffer]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joules

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtons


Newtons is force.
Joules is energy.

Let's not complicate things any further. Suffice to say expressing kinetic energy releases all types of forces.

[riffer]

Yeah, and those riders that refuse can be dealt with and will eventually be eradicated for all intents and purposes.


Look to Germany and what is required to be a license holder.

Till you half arse fucking pussies actually have something that will make a difference that vast, eat a bag of clocks ya fat cunt.

The fuck makes you think that I'm in charge? You mistake me for someone else, and your ignorant polemic is not only disproportionate but also way off target.

I'd love to be able to cancel all licences and make everyone sit new, harder ones, but we all know that's unrealistic. It would be nice, though, to have empty roads, until the economy collapsed.

You need to calm down and think about how to actually solve problems rather than create them mate.

[Graystone]

It's not just the deaths buddy. Orthapedic wards are full of bikers who didn't die, but who have a long time getting better. And mums with kids wondering how the fuck the family are gonna survive on 80% of their income for months and months.

They don't tend to do the rigorous crash analysis for injury accidents, so it is much harder to determine if speeding (as an offense) was the main factor.

[Drew]

I support your view and the simple fact is the faster you go the less time you have to react if shit happens. Most on here unlike you and myself have never experienced a crash as a result of someone else's fault and have the misguided illusion that there will always be time to get out of a situation but what they don't realise when someone else is at fault it is them who sets the time and speed.


I've been taken out by a woman who failed to stop. A big fine threat would have done nothing to change that scenario.
She'll never do it again though. She had to deal with me screaming in agony with a badly broken leg while the ambulance came.

[Drew]

The fuck makes you think that I'm in charge? You mistake me for someone else, and your ignorant polemic is not only disproportionate but also way off target.

I'd love to be able to cancel all licences and make everyone sit new, harder ones, but we all know that's unrealistic. It would be nice, though, to have empty roads, until the economy collapsed.

You need to calm down and think about how to actually solve problems rather than create them mate.

How does making cunts actually have to learn to ride/drive not a solution make?

Why do I pin this on you? Because you and that fucken Stoney retard are the cunts sitting down with ministers.

And what's wrong with a bit of aggression? World be a better place if cunts could just say what they think and not worry about someone getting sand in their hole.

[riffer]

How does making cunts actually have to learn to ride/drive not a solution make?

Why do I pin this on you? Because you and that fucken Stoney retard are the cunts sitting down with ministers.

And what's wrong with a bit of aggression? World be a better place if cunts could just say what they think and not worry about someone getting sand in their hole.

Yeah, in the perfect world its a great idea. So, are you prepared to pay an extra 5c in the dollar tax to make it happen? And pay more for your goods to arrive? All these things have a cost, and when you are trying to do something that will affect a large proportion of the public its gonna cost a bundle, and take a long time.

That's why TPTB decided to try and educate motorcyclists first, and introduce a more difficult driving test.

And you're right about the previous point. I don't believe the guy who pulled out in front of me will make that mistake again. But its a shit of a way to teach someone a lesson.

And the reason I sit down with ministers is because I try my fucking damndest to get off my arse and do something about the problem. But the best I can do is advocate. I don't make the decisions.

[Drew]

Yeah, in the perfect world its a great idea. So, are you prepared to pay an extra 5c in the dollar tax to make it happen? And pay more for your goods to arrive? All these things have a cost, and when you are trying to do something that will affect a large proportion of the public its gonna cost a bundle, and take a long time.

That's why TPTB decided to try and educate motorcyclists first, and introduce a more difficult driving test.

And you're right about the previous point. I don't believe the guy who pulled out in front of me will make that mistake again. But its a shit of a way to teach someone a lesson.

And the reason I sit down with ministers is because I try my fucking damndest to get off my arse and do something about the problem. But the best I can do is advocate. I don't make the decisions.
Yeah, I am willing to pay more tax. The happiest nation on the planet has one of the highest tax rates.

You'd have to be even more retarded than Stoney if you think the cost of driver training is going to be a 5% tax hike though. Mother fucker can pay for their own shit. Driving is not a right, and privilege doesn't come cheap


If you wanna make out that I'm stupid and haven't thought this through, be realistic in your fucking argument.

[Drew]

So you have changed your thinking slightly as while you may not have said centre line hug the right tyre track is so close in my opinion to not make any difference. The best position for escape from a head on collision is actually as far left of centre as possible but I will let you find that out yourself.
Less escape time for people pulling out. Which happens a metric shit ton more than people coming over the center line.

Do whatever ya want though. Our system is entirely built on the idea that special needs fuckwit moron like you is entitled to be on the road with the few other road users that are actually safe.

[Woodman]

In my worst accident I only got $500 from the person at fault and had to spend $25,000 more for a safer vehicle so if I get hit by a muppet again I would not be so badly injured. The muppet that hit me should have paid the $25,000 as well.

Now I know you are trolling. You cannot be that stupid that you think this is plausible..........................

[Woodman]

So if you are on a bend with cars parked on the side of the road you hug the right wheel track because a head on in your mind is less likely? Having been a victim in both types of accidents I would bet I would be more likely to live through a car pulling out than having a head on.

If you are on a bend with cars parked on the side of the road then you slow the fuck right down. Basic fucking hazard assessment.

[Woodman]

I am pretty sure that in the states people can claim damages to set themselves up in a far better way than here so it must be plausible. If you think about it often when there are industrial accidents in NZ employers can be fined tens of thousands of dollars that get awarded to victims. So all the authorities need to do then is apply industrial like compensation awards to innocent victims of traffic accidents as well.

We are not in the states thank fuck. And courts often do award part of the fine to the victim. ACC pick up the tab for any injuries. Its a great system that works well unlike the States where you pays through the nose for Insurance/lawyers etc.

[Graystone]

If you are on a bend with cars parked on the side of the road then you slow the fuck right down. Basic fucking hazard assessment.

Are you trying to say there isn't one rule that fits literally all situations? That's some dangerously progressive thinking, and I certainly know one poster who will not cope with it's like.

[Drew]

So if you are on a bend with cars parked on the side of the road you hug the right wheel track because a head on in your mind is less likely? Having been a victim in both types of accidents I would bet I would be more likely to live through a car pulling out than having a head on.


Nobody can be as thick as you are pretending to be.



Are you trying to say there isn't one rule that fits literally all situations? That's some dangerously progressive thinking, and I certainly know one poster who will not cope with it's like.


I certainly know that my head is turning inside out

[Akzle]

So you have changed your thinking slightly as while you may not have said centre line hug the right tyre track is so close in my opinion to not make any difference. The best position for escape from a head on collision is actually as far left of centre as possible but I will let you find that out yourself.
you're a fuckwit

So if you are on a bend with cars parked on the side of the road you hug the right wheel track because a head on in your mind is less likely? Having been a victim in both types of accidents I would bet I would be more likely to live through a car pulling out than having a head on.
you're a fuckwit

If the fine she got if you did press charges had been higher and a lot of it gone to you it would have been helpful towards your recovery/getting a new bike would it not? In my worst accident I only got $500 from the person at fault and had to spend $25,000 more for a safer vehicle so if I get hit by a muppet again I would not be so badly injured. The muppet that hit me should have paid the $25,000 as well.
you're a fuckwit

[granstar]

see, i think that's some horseshit. as with anything else in life, you acquire the skills to do shit effectively. displacement and HP are irrelevant, really.
I know 12 year olds i'd trust to drive my drunk ass home in a 6 litre v8,
and every time in auckland, i cringe that somehow these fuckwits have obtained a licence but I wouldn't trust them with my lawnmower, let alone the fucking 1.6lt turbo SUV wankfuck that they have "cos safety"
just have a look within 200kms of any town, they're lowering the speed limits - because these fuckwits take their traffic on holiday, and still drive into each other! and that's fuckall to do with youth. though obviously lacking the education/experience to handle their shit effectively <_<

Agree with that, I did shit young, was driving at 12, (mostly in paddocks), the speed limit was 50 back then, the cars were slower. When I went for my car licence at 15 ( had to for work) the cop asked me if I had a bike licence for the 500 Trumpy I was riding about. I didn't, he gave it to me saying "seen ya riding it about". I'm no saint but some of the drivers young and old out there are atrocious, a lot to do with attitude.

[FJRider]

I am pretty sure that in the states people can claim damages to set themselves up in a far better way than here so it must be plausible. If you think about it often when there are industrial accidents in NZ employers can be fined tens of thousands of dollars that get awarded to victims. So all the authorities need to do then is apply industrial like compensation awards to innocent victims of traffic accidents as well.

In the states ... people can SUE their employer in cases of accidents where the employer (or anybody that causes injury accidents) is at fault. Under the ACC scheme in NZ .. the right to sue has been removed.

[granstar]

The best position for escape from a head on collision is actually as far left of centre as possible but I will let you find that out yourself.

Disagree, how the fuxk would you know where the oncoming is going to go, it could go to the left in that case sitting right is potentially gonna save yer arse. Even straight on, standing on the pegs and going over is an option with less to squish you on exit, albeit flying.

[jellywrestler]

if I get hit by a muppet again I would not be so badly injured. The muppet that hit me should have paid the $25,000 as well.
which episode of the muppets was that?

[Woodman]

In NZ the courts decide the amount of damages to be awarded instead for industrial accidents but why should they be so much higher for industrial accidents when exactly the same pain and death can occur in road accidents?

Its relative to the size of the company.

[granstar]

Most vehicles that straddle the centre line don't do it fully though. But if you feel getting prepared to fly over the top is the best thing to do good luck with that.

Missed the point.

[Luckylegs]

Its relative to the size of the company.

The beatiful people... the beatuful peeople!

Oh sorry, that wax a steeple, not company

[GrayWolf]

Speeding fines came down quite some time ago


I believe the UK is looking at new fine legislation, Speed over the limit related, BUT I understand the max fine could be 150% of your weekly income.

[awayatc]

I believe the UK is looking at new fine legislation, Speed over the limit related, BUT I understand the max fine could be 150% of your weekly income.

I believe that's what they do in Switzerland. .....
Great idea.

[Voltaire]

see, i think that's some horseshit. as with anything else in life, you acquire the skills to do shit effectively. displacement and HP are irrelevant, really.
I know 12 year olds i'd trust to drive my drunk ass home in a 6 litre v8,
and every time in auckland, i cringe that somehow these fuckwits have obtained a licence but I wouldn't trust them with my lawnmower, let alone the fucking 1.6lt turbo SUV wankfuck that they have "cos safety"
just have a look within 200kms of any town, they're lowering the speed limits - because these fuckwits take their traffic on holiday, and still drive into each other! and that's fuckall to do with youth. though obviously lacking the education/experience to handle their shit effectively <_<

Lawnmower is about a near as you get to a motorcycle :yawn:

Auckland blah blah blah.... stay away it if offends you so much

[granstar]

Lawnmower is about a near as you get to a motorcycle :yawn:

Auckland blah blah blah.... stay away it if offends you so much

Its not just any lawnmower, its Akzle's. Assurance here it is not only Auckland,(infact recently spent a few days there, I thought the drivers and roads were great), its countrywide all the way to Plum Duff (refer road toll).

[Voltaire]

Fit speed limiters to cars
some sort of phone jamming device
photo of a cemetery and your famiy on the dash,
actual photos and footage of road carnage instead of nice policeman telling naughty drivers off.
Make the centre line so you can't cross it,
ensure trucks, campervans, caravans , trailers only use left lanes.

Make people resit licences like AU after so many years.

[granstar]

Fit speed limiters to cars Dangerous, you need enough power ( despite the law) to pass safely.Are we still obsessed that the road toll is all about speed, i'm tending to incompetence to drive at any speed is the problem?
some sort of phone jamming device Up the arse of any user!
photo of a cemetery and your family on the dash, I look out the window and see a cemetery all day, a family pic.., a picture of a sheep is easy enough, but be distracting.
actual photos and footage of road carnage instead of nice policeman telling naughty drivers off.
Like cigarettes packet graphics has stopped smoking hasn't it.
Make the centre line so you can't cross it,
Um how, good idea it would stop the fappers who ignore the yellow lines
ensure trucks, campervans, caravans , trailers only use left lanes.
Yeah let's employ cassindra to direct them that way. Why not slow down, take yer time, plan your travel allowing for traffic, and get there safely by sharing the road. Let the enforcers enforce.

Make people resit licences like AU after so many years.

I like most would fail, when there are/were any changes licenced drivers are not informed directly. A small informative test when renewing licence perhaps, at the more regular W.O.F where they could are informed of any changes to the code ( of course overseas visitors and illegal drivers will miss this), likely explains why the big confusion with roundabouts and indicating. Of course ignorance is not an excuse, but it is a reality.

[riffer]

The single biggest difference that could be made to the road toll is to put a barrier down the centreline of every major road in this country. The last government was offered this opportunity about 8 years ago, and failed to take it up, although the cost of it was similar to the tax cuts they offered the highest tax bracket.

There are some drivers that should not have licences. It would be good to see Police be given the opportunity to send people back to resit their licence. Give them, say, four weeks to resit their licence, and if they cannot pass they cannot drive. Have all cars fitted with a device that needs a drivers licence to be inserted into it to allow it to run. Use the technology we have with smart credit cards. As a failsafe use a retinal scan device to ensure the potential driver is the actual holder of the licence. Also have cars fitted with GPS devices that automatically send back information on driving habits back to a central repository and have the ability to deactivate the licence if driving is bad enough.

All of these measures could be achieved now - we have the money, and we have the technology.

Would the public stand for it?

Hell no.

[granstar]

The single biggest difference that could be made to the road toll is to put a barrier down the centreline of every major road in this country. There is only 1 - state highway 1, do all prangs occur on it, no, would only stop head ons, traffic teetering on right of centre are as big a problem when following. The last government was offered this opportunity about 8 years ago, and failed to take it up, although the cost of it was similar to the tax cuts they offered the highest tax bracket.

There are some drivers that should not have licences. It would be good to see Police be given the opportunity to send people back to resit their licence They do, after disqualification . Give them, say, four weeks to resit their licence, and if they cannot pass they cannot drive. Have all cars fitted with a device that needs a drivers licence to be inserted into it to allow it to run Tell me where on my vintage bike that will happen? . Use the technology we have with smart credit cards said . As a failsafe use a retinal scan device to ensure the potential driver is the actual holder of the licence and blind drunk . Also have cars fitted with GPS devices that automatically send back information on driving habits back to a central repository and have the ability to deactivate the licence if driving is bad enough. So you are riding, take some evasive action to avoid death because of some idjot, and your licence gets cut up?

All of these measures could be achieved now - we have the money, and we have the technology. We...excited about the new government?

Would the public stand for it?

Hell no. No brainer, these thoughts may directed at those in enforcement to be heard, copy paste to an MP. :2thumbsup

[Akzle]

The single biggest difference that could be made to the road toll is to put a barrier down the centreline of every major road in this country. The last government was offered this opportunity about 8 years ago, and failed to take it up, although the cost of it was similar to the tax cuts they offered the highest tax bracket.

There are some drivers that should not have licences. It would be good to see Police be given the opportunity to send people back to resit their licence. Give them, say, four weeks to resit their licence, and if they cannot pass they cannot drive. Have all cars fitted with a device that needs a drivers licence to be inserted into it to allow it to run. Use the technology we have with smart credit cards. As a failsafe use a retinal scan device to ensure the potential driver is the actual holder of the licence. Also have cars fitted with GPS devices that automatically send back information on driving habits back to a central repository and have the ability to deactivate the licence if driving is bad enough.

All of these measures could be achieved now - we have the money, and we have the technology.

Would the public stand for it?

Hell no.
and you sir, may fuck in the off direction.

[Kickaha]

Auckland blah blah blah.... stay away it if offends you so much
I try to get no closer than HD/Pokeno


Also have cars fitted with GPS devices that automatically send back information on driving habits back to a central repository and have the ability to deactivate the licence if driving is bad enough.


I feel like punching you in the throat just for thinking that one up, although you did only say cars

[FJRider]

In NZ the courts decide the amount of damages to be awarded instead for industrial accidents but why should they be so much higher for industrial accidents when exactly the same pain and death can occur in road accidents?

Under ACC you cannot sue the employer. Police charge the employer ... just as Police charge motorists that injure people. The Courts can award damages/reparation ... if they choose to.

[AllanB]

Fit speed limiters to cars
some sort of phone jamming device
photo of a cemetery and your famiy on the dash,
actual photos and footage of road carnage instead of nice policeman telling naughty drivers off.
Make the centre line so you can't cross it,
ensure trucks, campervans, caravans , trailers only use left lanes.

Make people resit licences like AU after so many years.

I have often wondered about the speed limiter thing - very very easy on anything with a computer.

So lets pretend it gets passed - how will the face of NZ vehicles change, lets face it what's the point of a supersport thou if it's limited to (say) 130?
Will we look elsewhere for our rides? Big cruisers maybe and midweight all purpose bikes? Something like Suzukis old GSX1400, and the Honda thou retro thing may be more suitable.

[AllanB]

Interesting weekend on the road down here - a trip to Dunedin in the car on Friday afternoon to load up and run back up Saturday with my daughter (also bringing her car back). Uneventful on the way down - there was a rush of ambos and cops in Oamarau - turns out a three car crash (and death). Hmmm must have missed the incident behind me my minutes ....

On the way back following daughter and Mrs B a cock in a orange Manaro (new one) tailgating me - passes with some gutso (hey mate it's smoking a lot ......) and then rides maybe three meters off my daughter tail for some kms before passing like a knob.

Said orange driver was seen about ten kms up on the side of the road getting a ticket from the police. Sure enough fifteen minutes later the arse-tailing and passing was repeated.

Conclusion. How do you legislate against the slow learner? You won't - he was no doubt slagging off the police for the rest of the weekend.

Side note - that last Commy Manaro - just does not look right.

[GazzaH]

If you see some tosser doing something stupid and dangerous on the road, and then being stopped by the rozzas up the road a ways, does it not occur to you to stop and express your dissatisfaction at their tossiness to the rozzas? The additional evidence, although unsubstantiated, might just make the difference between a warning and a prosecution. On top of that, what better way to vent your spleen? It might even help said tosser appreciate the effect their behaviour has on others - a wake up call maybe.

It's all very well whining on here and elsewhere, but why not seize the moment to make a difference?

Just sayin'

[Voltaire]

I have often wondered about the speed limiter thing - very very easy on anything with a computer.

So lets pretend it gets passed - how will the face of NZ vehicles change, lets face it what's the point of a supersport thou if it's limited to (say) 130?
Will we look elsewhere for our rides? Big cruisers maybe and midweight all purpose bikes? Something like Suzukis old GSX1400, and the Honda thou retro thing may be more suitable.

What is the point of 100+ HP bikes? I took my 70 HP 900ss out today and the best part was running it up thru the lower

gears.

Had a ST4S for a while but could not see the point of a fast bike and no Autobahns to ride it on.

NZ main highways are pathetic and will probably remain so.

Labour might introduce stuff like that as they are going to be a Nanny govt.

[george formby]

What is the point of 100+ HP bikes? I took my 70 HP 900ss out today and the best part was running it up thru the lower
gears.


Concur. Well, I get the point but have nowhere to ride one. Had a ride today minimising time on the Norfland State Highways, as you do. So lots of twisties and a nice gravel intermission. We had all of the Northland weather and the typical road conditions. Take your pick, it's just around the corner.
Potentially the quickest bike in our modest group makes about 40hp+.... Only weighs 130kg or so.. LOL.
The "big" bikes are in the 70hp bracket and only briefly get above 3rd.
Nobody appeared in the mirrors despite their being a big run up here. Much fun was had and no underpants stained.

[awayatc]

You have not answered my question in that what the courts award as damages in industrial accidents is substantially higher than for the same degree of injury/death if it happens on the road? I note a comment on the Stuff website about this topic today and it says "Life is Cheap" on NZ roads compared to other countries meaning there is little in the way of consequences for anyone found at fault.

You are a fuckwit

[george formby]

You have not answered my question in that what the courts award as damages in industrial accidents is substantially higher than for the same degree of injury/death if it happens on the road? I note a comment on the Stuff website about this topic today and it says "Life is Cheap" on NZ roads compared to other countries meaning there is little in the way of consequences for anyone found at fault.

Fair scenario.

Imagine, as a motorcyclist, licensed to ride safely and legally, you hit a dog. It ran past from behind you in a 50kmh zone, swerved in front and knocked you off.

The dog is not happy but gave you a beating.

When you wake up in your hospital bed one of your first visitors is a lawyer who hands over a bill for $26'000.

Vets bills, emotional harm, negligence, new collar and leash, previous riding history and so on used against you in court.

Best lawyer wins.

Industry is regulated, monitored, verified, adapted and systematic. The whole point is that it gets safer. Harm caused by not meeting the standard is true negligence.

What benefit to safety would equal penalties achieve against people who were obeying the law but just happen to be crap at controlling a vehicle?

S.Troll on YaaF

[russd7]

You have not answered my question in that what the courts award as damages in industrial accidents is substantially higher than for the same degree of injury/death if it happens on the road? I note a comment on the Stuff website about this topic today and it says "Life is Cheap" on NZ roads compared to other countries meaning there is little in the way of consequences for anyone found at fault.

it is really simple, courts award on ability to pay, there is no point in a court awarding or fining if all it means is the entity goes bankrupt without actually paying up, if you follow the worksafe rulings in court you should have noticed a large swing in the amount of fine dealt out to compensation, a business can insure against compensation but they cannot insure against fines and the fines are getting substantially larger and the courts now look in to a businesses books to ensure what it can afford to pay as in this case.


(worksafe media release)The Tasman Tanning Company Ltd was fined $380,000 and ordered to pay reparations to the victim of $18,000.

Notes:

The final fine imposed was $380,000.
The court ordered reparation of a total of $18,000 to the victim.
The Tasman Tanning Company Ltd was charged under sections 36, 48(1) and (2)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.
Being a PCBU, failed to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, the health and safety of workers who worked for the PCBU while they were at work in the business or undertaking, namely working on or near the mixing floor, and that failure exposed them to a risk of death or serious injury/illness, arising from exposure to hydrogen sulphide gas.
The maximum penalty under sections 36, 48(1) and (2)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 is a fine not exceeding $1.5 million.

and the difference being that an employer is making money from an employee where as joe public causing an accident is not getting financial gain

[actungbaby]

[QUOTE=Drew;1131070375]Oh yeah.

The BEST PLACE TO POSITION YOUR BIKE IS THE RIGHT TYRE TRACK.

I never said you need to always be there. It's a STARTING POSITION that offers the most options for escape.

My friend they cant see you there ;-)

Come on guys you all care other wise you whouldint get so fired up.

So dont flame each other where all on the same side here.

I just wish there be a campain to enforce common road code things.

Whats the point of a road code other wise.

It might be just me but am sick of people cutting corners . reversing out

On the other side of the road from there driveways. it says reverse out keep left to your side of the road. to me if to treat crossing the centre line as not a great idea , not on your bloody cell phones . i see it ever day. so why dont.

The bloody usless cops enforce and warn drivers to stop doing these lazy
attitudes its Kiwis biggest issue is lazness .

[riffer]

Hmmm. Some interesting feedback to my posts on here. Thanks guys.

I think I can sum most people here's attitude up with the following sentence:
"Everybody else is a bad driver; they should be sorted out, but don't touch me."

It's a pretty common attitude in this country. The problem is, we're all human, and we all make mistakes at times. Even us superior beings who choose two wheeled transport. Governments can do something about the problem. Unfortunately, any attempt to make a difference is going to impact on everybody, and the things that we like to do will get hit hard in the first instance.

One fella commented "how would an interactive ignition lock device work on my vintage motorcycle?" To be honest, it's irrelevant; a statistical anomaly. There are so few instances of this that it wouldn't matter; the majority of vehicles would be sorted by this kind of device.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not in any way advocating the use of these kinds of things - I'm merely pointing out that the current technology exists to allow this kind of thing to be put in a vehicle - and whichever government is in makes no difference - if the public demand for "something to be done" eventually some politician is going to make a decision which could impact us in a bad way.

I personally think the greater danger to our way of life is autonomous vehicles, and that it will show up in insurance premiums, backed up by sensors on the roads that will pick up a "registered" vehicle. They already have number plate recognition technology and it's used in the UK to determine whether vehicles are licensed. Over there it's not legal to operate a vehicle on the road if it's not insured. Anyway, I believe that in the future, insurance premiums for human-operated vehicles will rise and rise, making it uneconomic to operate such a vehicle on the road.

How many of us are prepared to genuinely become outlaws to ride our motorcycles? Science Fiction and it's portrayal of creeping fascism has been shown more and more to be incredibly prescient.

I see a future where the only place for motorcycles is on racetracks and private roads. And I don't really like it. But if we insist on claiming that "everyone else is a bad driver", then it may well happen. I hope I'm wrong.

[Ocean1]

it is really simple, courts award on ability to pay, there is no point in a court awarding or fining if all it means is the entity goes bankrupt without actually paying up, if you follow the worksafe rulings in court you should have noticed a large swing in the amount of fine dealt out to compensation, a business can insure against compensation but they cannot insure against fines and the fines are getting substantially larger and the courts now look in to a businesses books to ensure what it can afford to pay as in this case.



and the difference being that an employer is making money from an employee where as joe public causing an accident is not getting financial gain

As was the employee.

But as you say, they can't be responsible for their own safety, 'cause they can't afford it. :rolleyes:

And then, of course bankrupting employees would affect election results....

[Ocean1]

- if the public demand for "something to be done" eventually some politician is going to make a decision which could impact us in a bad way.

Aye, the trend is clear, whiney arsed bastards are the problem, shoot the fuckers.

[Voltaire]

Stats off Wiki,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

UK is lower but then they have proper motorways and when I lived there a better standard of driving.

I found Germany good to drive/ride in along with most of Northern EU, Spain, South of France and Portugal not so much ( and

they like breaking in to your vehicle too)

Other places I'd ridden its more bikes/scooters than cars so the in a large safe box mentality is less.

I suppose if you told someone 100 years ago you could drive at 100 kmph, change your music, play with your phone all at the

same time you'd have been seen as a superman.

At the end of the day there are a lot of vehicles on the road doing 100 k's separated by a 100mm white line and a human at

the wheel so things going wrong are inevitable, throw passengers talking, tiredness, substances into the mix and it gets

worse.

Autonomous vehicles are coming, I wonder what the SWAT discussions are like in Motorcycle boardrooms these days.

Audi: "Lets flog off Ducati as who is going to buy an electric one"

HD: " We're running out of Baby Boomers "

Japanese: " We are diversified already and Moto GP is just a bit of fun for us"

BMW: " we nearly got out of bikes before so not a biggie"

Rest of World: " we're still making Honda 50 scooters and bikes"

[Woodman]

Autonomous Ubers will be the future of cars. Just use the app on your phone and a car will show up.

Insurance for human driven cars will be very high, partly due to the cost of fixing them due to the lack of panelbeaters because autonomous cars won't get in very many accidents.

The cost of building cars for drivers will get higher as having to add steering wheels and dashboards etc will be an accessory. Meanwhile the economies of scale in building autonomous cars will make their price go down.

[jellywrestler]

My friends you've actually got friends?

[awayatc]

I hope these autonomous vehicles don't feel pressured to keep up with the rest of the group.

Also I want autonomous dogs programmed so they don't run in autonomous cars

[caspernz]

I hope these autonomous vehicles don't feel pressured to keep up with the rest of the group.

Also I want autonomous dogs programmed so they don't run in autonomous cars

But in the event of an accident will the ACC premium go up for the at fault vehicle? You know, as a lesson to do better in future :shutup::blink::innocent:

[Woodman]

You would think it would be the manufactures liability if a driverless car crashed as it was them that programmed everything it does. I would expect a few to go broke with the number of lawsuits they will get and I think there has already been lawsuits with some that have crashed overseas.

Nobody, not even autonomous cars are immune from accidents. Some are just unavoidable.

[Voltaire]

149 MPH Audi, no driver.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ol3g7i64RAI

No dogs were harmed.

[Woodman]

Some on here though think they will be as they will be cheaper than cars driven by humans to insure.

Can you show us where some on here have said that?

[Akzle]

Driverless vehicles are unlikely to be afforded by the masses in NZ for maybe 30 years because pay rates for the masses are not high enough. Tougher regulations really only need to be applied to those with a history of being at fault otherwise what incentive is there to improve?
No govt will make driving too expensive otherwise the economy will grind to a halt resulting in a lower tax take for them.
You need to think compulsory insurance could actually reduce road injuries and deaths as more people would drive/ride in fear of being in an at fault crash which could price them off the road with the group most likely to be affected being boy racers.

you're a fuckwit

[Woodman]

Maybe not some but 1 poster riffer #397 thinks so.

No he doesn't.................

[Akzle]

as thats what your reply tells me.

that's because you're a fuckwit

[Paul in NZ]

Driverless vehicles are unlikely to be afforded by the masses in NZ for maybe 30 years because pay rates for the masses are not high enough. Tougher regulations really only need to be applied to those with a history of being at fault otherwise what incentive is there to improve?
No govt will make driving too expensive otherwise the economy will grind to a halt resulting in a lower tax take for them.
You need to think compulsory insurance could actually reduce road injuries and deaths as more people would drive/ride in fear of being in an at fault crash which could price them off the road with the group most likely to be affected being boy racers.

I think you are wrong as can be...

Driverless cars need not be owned - using the UBER model you just pay for a journey so actual ownership isn't needed. ie I need to go to the station - use an app to order the ride and just leave it at the station to go to the next appointment.. Driverless cars wont give you the pleasure of driving so why invest? This is a disruptive technology that will totally change the model..

[HenryDorsetCase]

I think you are wrong as can be...

Driverless cars need not be owned - using the UBER model you just pay for a journey so actual ownership isn't needed. ie I need to go to the station - use an app to order the ride and just leave it at the station to go to the next appointment.. Driverless cars wont give you the pleasure of driving so why invest? This is a disruptive technology that will totally change the model..

Here's another thing that won't matter either: brand of car. Who cares if it's a Ford, Holden, Toyota, Audi or Maserati if it's just a box that shows up at your house which you dont drive (it drives itself) and you only pay for the journey?

I would draw the line at a Ford, of course.

[Akzle]

I think you are wrong as can be...

Driverless cars need not be owned - using the UBER model you just pay for a journey so actual ownership isn't needed. ie I need to go to the station - use an app to order the ride and just leave it at the station to go to the next appointment.. Driverless cars wont give you the pleasure of driving so why invest? This is a disruptive technology that will totally change the model..

you're perhaps forgetting that people have been conditioned to LIKE owning shit (often times by debt). so for at least the next couple of generations, that's not going to be the happening thing.

to extend that, que bono? who will you be paying for your journey? who will do the maintenance on the cars/computers/software?
who will PROFIT??


also, trying to explain anything to c*ssina that doesn't align with her four tenets of reality is an exercise in frustration.
"winning an argument with an intelligent man is hard, winning an argument with [fuckwit] is impossible"

[Woodman]

He may not have said it directly but he did say cars that are driven by humans will cost more to insure which in my mind means he thinks self drive cars will be safer otherwise why would they cost less to insure? I have yet to read such a claim from the insurance industry.

We were talking about being immune from accidents like you claim "others on here" said about rider training making them immune. It is all in your head and has never been said on here by anyone ever. Basically, you make shit up.

What akzle says...

[Woodman]

Here's another thing that won't matter either: brand of car. Who cares if it's a Ford, Holden, Toyota, Audi or Maserati if it's just a box that shows up at your house which you dont drive (it drives itself) and you only pay for the journey?

I would draw the line at a Ford, of course.

Interesting times for the marketing people re branding and obselescence. Mind you the cellphone guys manage to get people to line up for days waiting to buy the newest Iphone etc, so maybe the car guys will make some Ubers uncool/unfashionable to be seen in.

[Voltaire]

Was in Romania in 2004 and the kids counted 200 odd horse and carriages from Bulgaria to Transylvania and a lamborghini, I'll bet there are bugger all H/C's

now....other than Vlad Cassinavitch who still owns one.:rolleyes:

[AllanB]

If you see some tosser doing something stupid and dangerous on the road, and then being stopped by the rozzas up the road a ways, does it not occur to you to stop and express your dissatisfaction at their tossiness to the rozzas? The additional evidence, although unsubstantiated, might just make the difference between a warning and a prosecution. On top of that, what better way to vent your spleen? It might even help said tosser appreciate the effect their behaviour has on others - a wake up call maybe.

It's all very well whining on here and elsewhere, but why not seize the moment to make a difference?

Just sayin'

Thought about that to be fair when I saw the flashing lights ahead (figured it would be him) however the thing with people who drive with such disregard for others is after your vent, the fucks will be nudging your arse on the road (or worse my daughters) in about fifteen minutes, fucked off and angry with the world for giving them a ticket.

[AllanB]

Here's another thing that won't matter either: brand of car. Who cares if it's a Ford, Holden, Toyota, Audi or Maserati if it's just a box that shows up at your house which you dont drive (it drives itself) and you only pay for the journey?

I would draw the line at a Ford, of course.


Nah - brand snobs will still exist. The 'Uber" (for want of another name) auto cars will have levels of 'taxi' budget, standard, luxury. As long as lawyers are around the luxury taxi will be secure.

[onearmedbandit]

You are trying to twist what the other poster was assuming would happen with driverless cars in that they would be safer than cars driven by humans as they would attract a lower insurance premium due to this.

Holy fuck...

[awayatc]

You are trying to twist what the other poster was assuming would happen with driverless cars in that they would be safer than cars driven by humans as they would attract a lower insurance premium due to this.

You are a fuckwit....

Sorry

You are an uber fuckwit....

[Woodman]

You are trying to twist what the other poster was assuming would happen with driverless cars in that they would be safer than cars driven by humans as they would attract a lower insurance premium due to this.

Not twisting anything, rather just reading the posts and proving that you are making shit up. Stop making shit up. Actually keep on making shit up as it is entertaining.

YAAF

[AllanB]

Actually keep on making shit up as it is entertaining.

YAAF

It is sure interesting see how others think.

[Akzle]

It is sure interesting see how others think.

if one is of a mind, to be interested.

otherwise one might repeat the same shit. again and again. and never learn anything ever.

[Akzle]

You are a fuckwit....

Sorry

You are an uber fuckwit....

puntastic. must spread...

[veldthui]

Did the 1KC from Hamilton on Saturday. On SH5 just before it turns off to SH28 there was a cop that had pulled someone over and was giving him a ticket. Just around the corner not 100 meters away was this huge pothole in the road. Just beyond that was 3 cars pulled over with various states of damage to their cars which included 2 flat tires on the right side of each car. Just around the turn off was another 3 cars with more damage and more flat tires. These people were going no where as nobody carries 2 spares with them. This cop should have been warning cars of the road and doing something to get it fixed instead of giving tickets to cars going down the hill a bit fast.
If someone had decided to try and dodge the pothole they could have easily lost control in the wet and drifted across the road into the path of another car.

[granstar]

if one is of a mind, to be interested.

otherwise one might repeat the same shit. again and again. and never learn anything ever.

So at last the post has ended then, and in conclusion was the Police's obsession of blaming speed as main cause of the road toll correct? :facepalm:

[rastuscat]

If the fine she got if you did press charges had been higher and a lot of it gone to you it would have been helpful towards your recovery/getting a new bike would it not? In my worst accident I only got $500 from the person at fault and had to spend $25,000 more for a safer vehicle so if I get hit by a muppet again I would not be so badly injured. The muppet that hit me should have paid the $25,000 as well.

Don't wait for justice from the justice system.

A better plan is to ride in a manner that has a safety margin to avoid crashes in the first place. Avoid the justice system.

[FJRider]

You have not answered my question in that what the courts award as damages in industrial accidents is substantially higher than for the same degree of injury/death if it happens on the road?

A workplace should be safe for the employee. Higher risk jobs usually pay higher wages ... but most workplaces are usually low risk.

Faulty or incorrect equipment used ... or household appliances used in commercial situations ... can make work a dangerous place to be. Employees removing safety guards to clean or unblock moving parts is not a good idea if the machinery is still working.


But still the fault (apparently) of the employer ... :shifty:



Driving on the road is not really dangerous (apparently) ... otherwise no self respecting parent would let their 16 year (barely licensed) old children drive/ride on the roads ... :shifty:

[FJRider]

... Avoid the justice system.

As a motorcyclist ... I try.

Well ... the enforcement part anyway ...:innocent:

[Akzle]

Did the 1KC from Hamilton on Saturday. On SH5 just before it turns off to SH28 there was a cop that had pulled someone over and was giving him a ticket. Just around the corner not 100 meters away was this huge pothole in the road. Just beyond that was 3 cars pulled over with various states of damage to their cars which included 2 flat tires on the right side of each car. Just around the turn off was another 3 cars with more damage and more flat tires. These people were going no where as nobody carries 2 spares with them. This cop should have been warning cars of the road and doing something to get it fixed instead of giving tickets to cars going down the hill a bit fast.
If someone had decided to try and dodge the pothole they could have easily lost control in the wet and drifted across the road into the path of another car.

you should have stopped off and picked up some grammer and punctuation and a "return carriage" key for your keyboard

[Akzle]

So at last the post has ended then, and in conclusion was the Police's obsession of blaming speed as main cause of the road toll correct? :facepalm:

pretty sure i covered all that off earlier in the thread.

try and keep up grandma

[Akzle]

The old belief on here that many have including you from your above post that there is always time to brake or swerve etc irrespective of what party is at fault.

you're a fuckwit

[Bikemad]

In NZ the courts decide the amount of damages to be awarded instead for industrial accidents but why should they be so much higher for industrial accidents when exactly the same pain and death can occur in road accidents?

because the employer is profiting from his employees labour and therefore has a responsibility to ensure the safety of said employee.......you fuckwit

[GrayWolf]

There's a pretty simple reason that TPTB concentrate on velocity in attempting to reduce the casualty rate on the road, and I fear that a lot of people have such a negative understanding of it due to the simplicity of the campaign.

You see, there's two different types of people in this world:

those that are too hick to understand anything that has anything to do with math; and
those that turn off because they dislike being treated like idiots.


I'd put myself in the latter category.

And since most of the people here are also in the latter category, I'll talk about how it's been explained to me. Any type 1s can just move on here as there will be some maths.

You see, it's all about overall reduction of speed causing overall reduction of harm.

If look at any type of crash, anything that carries mass is going to have a significant amount of kinetic energy. And as we know the formula for kinetic energy tells us that the kinetic energy is half the mass times the velocity squared, or

K.E = m/2 * v^2

So how does that work in principle?

well, if we consider for argument's sake that a rider in leathers, kitted up weighs 100kg, and the bike weighs 200kg, and the bike and rider is doing 100kms/hour, then the kinetic energy is 300,000 joules. A rider that weighs 110kgs on that bike will have a kinetic energy of 310,000 joules.

But, if we increase the speed by 10km/hour, then the original 100kg rider will have a kinetic energy of 363,000 joules. So an increase of 10km/hr has an increase of 21% in kinetic energy. But an increase of 10% in weight has an increase of only 9% in kinetic energy.

And what's kinetic energy? Well its the force that gonna fuck you up in you hit something. It breaks bones, it tears tendons, and it wrecks bodies.

But there's a lot of thick people out there. And we know that a small increase in speed causes a disproportionate increase in the energy expressed in a crash. But that means nothing to thick people, so they've dumbed it down - The Higher the Speed, The Bigger The Damage. It's true, but not many understand why it is.

I really didn't give a fuck about the message. I'd been riding 38 years, and riding litre bikes for about 14 years straight, without a major accident.

Until the evening of September 11, 2017, when a blind idiot in a Nissan Navara Ute pulled directly into my path on SH58 (Plimmerton-Haywards-Hutt Highway) from a side track hidden by overgrown bushes, saw me, and froze. Directly into the path of me and my Aprilia RSV. And I was at the speed limit (I think - I wasn't looking a the speedo so I guess it was about that speed. It was the normal speed I do there, which is about 95-99).

I can remember hearing the voices of my riding instructor in our emergency braking practice yelling at me to "brake harder, harder, you can brake harder than that Simon!" And believe, me I scrubbed off as much speed as I could.

But it wasn't enough. They estimate I hit the ute at approximately 65km/hr, was propelled four metres up and six metres forward, somersaulted twice, and landed in a heap, unconscious. I've gotten this information from witnesses subsequent to the accident. I woke up in the ambulance, spent three weeks in the hospital, and I'm still on ACC now. Broken bones and a brachial plexus injury that has my right arm partially paralysed.

The Police officer, the ambulance officer, my surgeons, my OTs, my nurses and countless other people I've talked to have told me how lucky I am - how most people don't survive these accidents.

Apparently had I been doing as little as 10kms over the speed limit when the accident occurred, I would not have survived. 5kms over the limit I would have permanently lost the use of my arm, and had significantly more broken bones.

So, I've spent the last eight weeks thinking about speed in terms of kinetic energy. And as a result, I've come to understand where these guys are coming from. Because I've had it explained to me. And there's some problems with a differing rate of velocity to what the majority of other vehicles are doing. As most other road users are travelling at an expected speed those at a different speed, be it higher or lower, cause difficulty in the brains of the other road users as they are an unexpected occurrence. They will assume vehicles are travelling at certain speeds and pull out, or in front of people, and this could catch you out. Another problem is that, if things do go wrong, and they do, it increases the likelihood of you getting hurt. Any impact straight into a solid object in excess of 80km/hr is invariably fatal. And if it's not, recovery time is long.

I won't be able to ride again for 18-24 months. I'm not sure how I'll feel about exceeding the speed limit then. I imagine I'll probably be unable to resist the feel of the big bikes. But I will be doing so now with the realisation of how much it hurts when you hit something, and how long it takes to come back afterwards. At 50, let me tell you, it isn't as easy to recover as it was when I was 18.

Fire away with the hate if you like. Or engage positively. Either way, you can't ignore, or change, physics.

That is only partly true... it ISN'T velocity that injures or kills, it's the things that interupt and/or bring to a sudden stop our progress. People have come offf bikes at 150mph + and 'walked away' {maybe with gravel rash, minor break and bruising, to, serious fractures}.
Our roads are littered with motorcyclist unsafe 'furniture'. While I will agree speed has a direct and indirect effect of the level of injury sustained, I'd also remind you, you can break bones at 'running speed' or less.

[granstar]

The old belief on here that many have including you from your above post that there is always time to brake or swerve etc irrespective of what party is at fault.

WTF!! proactive defensive riding has nothing to do with post reaction time dilemma's that doesn't appear anyone here has alluded to but thyself through drivel.

[FJRider]

How is it worked out that driving is not as dangerous as the workplace when substantially more are injured and die on the roads than in the workplace each year?

Perhaps ... driving to the conditions ... and be obeying all the road rules will be safer.

Perhaps ... the act of driving/Riding IS SAFE. Just perhaps ... it's the many DRIVERS / RIDERS that are unsafe ... to the point of making driving more dangerous than it really needs to be.

[FJRider]

WTF!! proactive defensive riding has nothing to do with post reaction time dilemma's that doesn't appear anyone here has alluded to but thyself through drivel.

Her slow uptake on the simplest explanations ... is probably the reason she gets herself into so much bother on the road.

[FJRider]

There's a pretty simple reason that TPTB concentrate on velocity in attempting to reduce the casualty rate on the road, and I fear that a lot of people have such a negative understanding of it due to the simplicity of the campaign.

You see, there's two different types of people in this world:

those that are too hick to understand anything that has anything to do with math; and

It has little to do with maths ... just simply speed (Velocity) is only one factor as the cause of many accidents. Multiple factors (road surface condition, stupidity, weather conditions, stupidity, fatigue, sun strike, stupidity, inattention, stupidity, wrong place on the road, (to name but a few) ... ALL combine to cause accidents. Speed in itself is not the predominant issue. Just that in most cases (as you may have discovered) ... the (your) outcome would've been vastly improved had the speed been less.

The speed limit does not guarantee it will be a safe speed on that (or any) road ... at that (or any) time. It only indicates the LEGAL limit for that road.

Stupid decisions kill more people than speed in itself ever will.


those that turn off because they dislike being treated like idiots.


Perhaps ... THEY ARE IDIOTS THEN ... ;)

[Woodman]

The old belief on here that many have including you from your above post that there is always time to brake or swerve etc irrespective of what party is at fault.

Nobody has said that though. Are you making shit up again???

[ellipsis]

Nobody has said that though. Are you making shit up again???


...she doesn't make this up...it's obviously shit lodged in her neural passages and just falls out of her grey matter, (her semblance of disassociated brain cells), onto her keyboard...nobody could be so arrogantly thick with even a childs brain...

[Akzle]

So if you crash and hit a tree its the fault of the tree being where it is and not your speed?

i'ts probably your fault because you're a fuckwit.

[Scuba_Steve]

i'ts probably your fault because you're a fuckwit.

:rofl::killingme
It might just be that it's a slow day but that, that I found amusing to great extent
Also "spread rep" & all that

[rastuscat]

The old belief on here that many have including you from your above post that there is always time to brake or swerve etc irrespective of what party is at fault.

No, not always. But often there is.

[rastuscat]

And when there is time it's just down to being more aware of your riding environment


There ya go, fixed it for ya.

[YellowDog]

So if you crash and hit a tree its the fault of the tree being where it is and not your speed?

Nothing to do with speed, just inability to control vehicle under said circumstances.

[FJRider]

So if you crash and hit a tree its the fault of the tree being where it is and not your speed?

To use YOUR logic ... if you are under the speed limit ... it couldn't be HIS fault ... :shifty:

[awayatc]

There ya go, fixed it for ya.

Unfortunately these wise words will be wasted on the big C.....

Pearls and swines etc...

[FJRider]

I think you will find that with most vehicle v tree crashes excessive speed is a contributing factor.

Tree's DO NOT SPEED shit for brains ... <_<

[awayatc]

Tree's DO NOT SPEED shit for brains ... <_<


Trust me.....the big C can only aspire to one day being able to upgrade to shit for brains....

That would be a huge step forward

[granstar]

Ohh!, Thanks for clarifying, I can go back to my knitting now and rest easy.

[Akzle]

I am meaning the vehicle shit for brains!!

:facepalm:
you're a fuckwit.

[Honest Andy]

I am meaning the vehicle shit for brains!!

I saw a shitforbrains once parked under a tree. I think is was a Mitsubishi. It was between a Toyota Enema and a Renault Migraine

It didn't look very fast

[Berries]

I think you will find that with most vehicle v tree crashes excessive speed is a contributing factor.
In the 600 injury crashes last year where a tree was hit travelling too fast for the conditions was listed as a possible contributing factor (for the vehicle) in less than a third of them.

[FJRider]

Trust me.....the big C can only aspire to one day being able to upgrade to shit for brains....

That would be a huge step forward

You can't beat commonsense into idiots with a big hammer ... but it might be fun to try ... :devil2:

[FJRider]

:facepalm:
you're a fuckwit.

Don't be so polite ... ;)

[rastuscat]

Great to have some real intellectual discussion going on. Thanks fellas.

[granstar]

Great to have some real intellectual discussion going on. Thanks fellas.

Appears not all fellas here :laugh:

[scumdog]

Great to have some real intellectual discussion going on. Thanks fellas.

A rare event on KB!:yes:

So rare in fact that I failed to find any...

[riffer]

I know.

I spent a huge amount of time typing my stuff with one hand on account of being half crippled by some dickhead pulling in front of my Aprilia and no bastard understood a word of what I said.

Sigh.

Here goes again.

Velocity in excess of the speed limit doesn't necessarily cause accidents, up to a certain level.

What it does do is decide how much it's gonna fuck you up if you hit something.

It's impossible to argue with that is it? Don't answer that; I'm sure some fool will try. :bleh:

[Berries]

Who can argue with simple physics?

I do question the "up to a certain level" comment though. What do you mean by that?

[rastuscat]

Who can argue with simple physics?

I do question the "up to a certain level" comment though. What do you mean by that?

Speed causes some crashes. Not many, but some. It makes gap selection harder for observers, makes poor corcornering lines far worse, makes bad calls turn out worse.

Of those crashes not csused by speed, certainly the greater the speed, the worse the outcome.

The speed obsession grew in the
early 80s when someone realised thst crashes are virtually inevitable, as humans make human errors. So by slowing everyone down, the inevitable crashes will happen at lower speeds, with less kinetic energy imparted.

Of course, if we were all awesome drivers then speed wouldn't be a problem. But collectively we aren't entirely O for orsum.

[Akzle]

Of course, if we were all awesome drivers then speed wouldn't be a problem. But collectively we aren't entirely O for orsum.

so. why are the shit ones allowed?
surely if they weren't, the remainder would get where we're going faster and safer

[Akzle]

Who can argue with simple physics?


i could name one... but i don't want to invoke it's stupidity.

[awayatc]

i could name one... but i don't want to invoe it's stupidity.

She's a fuckwit

[caspernz]

I know.

I spent a huge amount of time typing my stuff with one hand on account of being half crippled by some dickhead pulling in front of my Aprilia and no bastard understood a word of what I said.

Sigh.

Here goes again.

Velocity in excess of the speed limit doesn't necessarily cause accidents, up to a certain level.

What it does do is decide how much it's gonna fuck you up if you hit something.

It's impossible to argue with that is it? Don't answer that; I'm sure some fool will try. :bleh:

Some of us get it Simon, the hard part is conveying that it can happen to any of us.

The catchphrase is appropriate to the conditions, that's the bit lost on many. Having an intelligent conversation on the subject requires admitting ones' own failings, and making changes to how we ride/drive. I'll freely admit that when I went down the path of advanced rider training I was humbled many times, for I was nowhere near as aware as I am today. Still a work in progress though...

The basics we get wrong are common, speed is but one of those factors. Education and enforcement.

Best wishes with your recovery.

[Scuba_Steve]

Speed causes some crashes. Not many, but some. It makes gap selection harder for observers, makes poor corcornering lines far worse, makes bad calls turn out worse.

Of those crashes not csused by speed, certainly the greater the speed, the worse the outcome.

The speed obsession grew in the
early 80s when someone realised thst crashes are virtually inevitable, as humans make human errors. So by slowing everyone down, the inevitable crashes will happen at lower speeds, with less kinetic energy imparted.

Of course, if we were all awesome drivers then speed wouldn't be a problem. But collectively we aren't entirely O for orsum.

Course alot of studies suggest that this has had the negative effect of increasing those crashes & end of the day no crash is safer than a slow crash
The other problem is there is so many variables in crashes that looking at a car hit a brick wall & saying "doing that at a slower speed will be safer" is redundant as speed has little bearing when what you're crashing into is a branch sticking out from a tree, a y-post unsecured flying out from the vehicle that hit you, finding yourself under a truck, sliding into cheese cutters, falling off a cliff etc etc
I'd actually assume hitting a large flat surface is probably in the vast minority of crashes allowing for many other things to kill you other than impact force

[MD]

Speed causes some crashes. Not many, but some. It makes gap selection harder for observers, makes poor corcornering lines far worse, makes bad calls turn out worse.

Of those crashes not csused by speed, certainly the greater the speed, the worse the outcome.

The speed obsession grew in the
early 80s when someone realised thst crashes are virtually inevitable, as humans make human errors. So by slowing everyone down, the inevitable crashes will happen at lower speeds, with less kinetic energy imparted.

Of course, if we were all awesome drivers then speed wouldn't be a problem. But collectively we aren't entirely O for orsum.

Quite right. By the 80s cheap, lighter and faster Jap imports were flooding the country. Young inexperienced folks suddenly found themselves going much faster 3 months after getting a licence. I'm sure it happen a bit but I don't recall in the 60s & 70s carloads of youths totally destroying themselves in a vehicle wrapped around a tree wrecked beyond recognition with 3 or 4 mates in the car.

Speed certainly makes the outcome worse and reduces the chances of being able to take evasive action when something goes unexpected wrong. We must all weigh up the time and place and take our chances. For all my speeding sins, never endangering others is the first consideration on my mind.

[rastuscat]

Quite right. By the 80s cheap, lighter and faster Jap imports were flooding the country. Young inexperienced folks suddenly found themselves going much faster 3 months after getting a licence. I'm sure it happen a bit but I don't recall in the 60s & 70s carloads of youths totally destroying themselves in a vehicle wrapped around a tree wrecked beyond recognition with 3 or 4 mates in the car.

Speed certainly makes the outcome worse and reduces the chances of being able to take evasive action when something goes unexpected wrong. We must all weigh up the time and place and take our chances. For all my speeding sins, never endangering others is the first consideration on my mind.

Our worst ever road toll was in 1973. When the population was half what is was now, and most families only had one car.

We managed to kill 843 people that year. It wouldn't be so bad if we could choose who they were, trouble is, they are mostly just Mr and Mrs Average, and all the little Averages.

No ABS, no crumple zones, cross ply tyres, no side impact beams, no air bags. Roads were dreadful back then, cats eyes didn't exist, not did retro reflective marker posts, or the median barrier down the Auckland Harbour Bridge.

My, how things have changed. Lower breath test limits, vehicle impoundment, a focus on seatbelts. In 1973 seatbelts weren't even in the back seat, let alone compulsory.

[Woodman]

The Swedish approach. Basically accidents will keep happening so lessen their severity.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/98689390/reducing-crash-severity-will-cut-road-toll-experts-say

[AllanB]

The Swedish approach. Basically accidents will keep happening so lessen their severity.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/98689390/reducing-crash-severity-will-cut-road-toll-experts-say

Has some merit.

Labour like giving away money - maybe the government will give everyone a $20,000 trade-in for your pre year 2000 car?

[Ocean1]

The Swedish approach. Basically accidents will keep happening so lessen their severity.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/98689390/reducing-crash-severity-will-cut-road-toll-experts-say

And German. http://www.dw.com/en/european-towns-remove-traffic-signs-to-make-streets-safer/a-2143663-1

And Dutch. http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/controlled-chaos-european-cities-do-away-with-traffic-signs-a-448747.html

Fancy that, making people responsible for their own decisions makes them... responsible. Whoda thought?

Bonus point: removing all of the signs makes fewer motorcycle accidents... fatal.

There's this thing about institutional authority that always smells a bit whiff,though: It's just as authoritative when it's wrong.

[jellywrestler]

cats eyes didn't exist, .

they were invented in world war two as people had to drive with as little light as possible, but we didn't see them here for a long time after

[jellywrestler]

Lower breath test limits, .

did they even have breath tests those days, most times if you were pulled over the law would take you home

[Akzle]

Has some merit.

Labour like giving away money - maybe the government will give everyone a $20,000 trade-in for your pre year 2000 car?

buy my magna bro.


but also, fuck that gayshit.

[Berries]

The Swedish approach. Basically accidents will keep happening so lessen their severity.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/98689390/reducing-crash-severity-will-cut-road-toll-experts-say
The New Zealand approach even gets a mention in the link you posted.

http://www.saferjourneys.govt.nz/

[george formby]

I'm waiting for a speeding ticket to turn up in the post.... Passing a double trailer quarry truck on an overtaking lane with 11 other vehicles behind me, very close behind me. I thought getting past efficiently to avoid playing snooker when the lanes merged was the safest bet. We will see if the Federale hiding behind the crest feels the same way.

:mad:

Caveat, I overtook on the assumption that the truck would slow significantly.... That thing must have had 1000hp, I had to put the boot in or crawl past.

Such is life.

[rastuscat]

did they even have breath tests those days, most times if you were pulled over the law would take you home

When I started in 1988 the level was 500. Think it came down around 1991 ish.

[Swoop]

they were invented in world war two as people had to drive with as little light as possible, but we didn't see them here for a long time after

Sorry, wrong.
Pre-war invention. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Shaw

[awayatc]

And German. http://www.dw.com/en/european-towns-remove-traffic-signs-to-make-streets-safer/a-2143663-1

And Dutch. http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/controlled-chaos-european-cities-do-away-with-traffic-signs-a-448747.html

Fancy that, making people responsible for their own decisions makes them... responsible. Whoda thought?

Bonus point: removing all of the signs makes fewer motorcycle accidents... fatal.

There's this thing about institutional authority that always smells a bit whiff,though: It's just as authoritative when it's wrong.


But how can you issuse infringement notices when there are no signs/ rules to disobey. ...?

[rastuscat]

But how can you issuse infringement notices when there are no signs/ rules to disobey. ...?

Just look at what happens when traffic lights are faulty. They switch to flashing amber.

People are then expected to apply the basic giveaway rules. There are so many folk who are clueless that just stop and wait for something or someone to control them.

Others with clues get pissy when they are supposed to give way but the car they are supposed to give way to is busy giving way to them.

It ends up being the decisive who progress. I expect that's what would happen if all controls were removed.

It was interesting being a cop during the first few hours and days after the earthquake. It could have easily turned to mayhem, but folk just caught a disease called "community spirit" and things rolled pretty well.

[Ocean1]

Just look at what happens when traffic lights are faulty. They switch to flashing amber.

People are then expected to apply the basic giveaway rules. There are so many folk who are clueless that just stop and wait for something or someone to control them.

Others with clues get pissy when they are supposed to give way but the car they are supposed to give way to is busy giving way to them.

It ends up being the decisive who progress. I expect that's what would happen if all controls were removed.

It was interesting being a cop during the first few hours and days after the earthquake. It could have easily turned to mayhem, but folk just caught a disease called "community spirit" and things rolled pretty well.

You don't have to wait for earthquakes, most of Asia cheerfully ignores any signage and all of the official rules with pretty much the same results.

[Scuba_Steve]

Just look at what happens when traffic lights are faulty. They switch to flashing amber.

People are then expected to apply the basic giveaway rules. There are so many folk who are clueless that just stop and wait for something or someone to control them.

Others with clues get pissy when they are supposed to give way but the car they are supposed to give way to is busy giving way to them.

It ends up being the decisive who progress. I expect that's what would happen if all controls were removed.

It was interesting being a cop during the first few hours and days after the earthquake. It could have easily turned to mayhem, but folk just caught a disease called "community spirit" and things rolled pretty well.

That would be an incorrect assumption; people get confused at the flashing amber because they're used to pretty coloured lights telling them what to do, people don't have to think about driving the NZTA keeps trying more & more to make sure the roads do that for them which is why the class of driving out there is so piss poor but make people think & driving standards would improve much like how bikers are better drivers through necessity we have to think when we're out there

[scumdog]

That would be an incorrect assumption; people get confused at the flashing amber because they're used to pretty coloured lights telling them what to do, people don't have to think about driving the NZTA keeps trying more & more to make sure the roads do that for them which is why the class of driving out there is so piss poor but make people think & driving standards would improve much like how bikers are better drivers through necessity we have to think when we're out there

Re your last comment: Read tomorrows newspaper about a 'better driver' biker that wasn't.

[R650R]

I hereby submit forthwith evidence of the police xmas club... they even have enough spare cash for decorations!

Jesus just noticed hes wearing his seatbelt in parking lot!

[GazzaH]

As the world moves inexorably towards replacing braincells with silicon, autonomous cars are just around the corner.

I wonder whether the programming and testing they do in the labs involve motorbikes coming up fast, tilting towards them, swerving around them and, for that matter, sliding up alongside and past them in the same lane or at the lights?

I wonder if there are standard test scenarios for proving the safety of robot cars? And if so, who'd care to hazard a guess about what proportion of those tests involve motorbikes?

[neels]

There was no speed to worry about driving to ashvegas today, old git in a suzuki swift doing 60-70 then speeding up on the passing lanes so only about 4 of the 40 or so cars stuck behind him could pass. Breezed on by several cops with their radars on, but apparently as he wasn't doing >4kph above the speed limit didn't warrant their attention.

[Berries]

I wonder whether the programming and testing they do in the labs involve motorbikes coming up fast, tilting towards them, swerving around them and, for that matter, sliding up alongside and past them in the same lane or at the lights?
Motorbikes are incompatible with the future. When all vehicles are limited to a certain speed and travel in convoy they aren't going to let some goober actually enjoy themselves on two wheels and, erm, break a rule or two on occasion. If and when the government finally decides that nobody should die on the roads we are out of there.

Obviously nobody would have the balls to do that so we will be priced out of things. My rego says so.

[GazzaH]

I think I am future-incompatible too, in that case.

Time to start stockpiling pre-computer vehicles.

[Swoop]

...autonomous cars are just around the corner.
Not in our lifetime.

I have to agree with The Grand Tour (S2 E2) where they quite rightly point out the flaws in the computer systems that will make autonomous cars an absolute hazard.

[granstar]

[QUOTE=GazzaH;1131077447]I think I am future-incompatible too, in that case.

Time to start stockpiling pre-computer vehicles.[/QUOTE

334109

[Akzle]

I read a story where they think it will be 2040 before they are perfected enough for NZ roads. Having said that I remember a media statement that the National Govt was keen for them to be tested on NZ roads. We are lucky that National are no longer in maybe.

you're a fuckwit

[Voltaire]

I think I am future-incompatible too, in that case.

Time to start stockpiling pre-computer vehicles.

Luddies are now my heros

334117

334118

[Akzle]

Your a retard because they are the only 3 words you know. Or maybe you are yet to start school so you can learn more? If you are yet to start school I apologise for calling you a retard.
:rofl:
you're a fuckwit.

[babysteps]

Soooo, while there is a Fuckwit fest going on above, why not contemplate this novel idea...

Stop focusing on speed and start focusing on retraining drivers every X years. We are the biggest problem, not speed or roads.

[george formby]

Your a retard because they are the only 3 words you know. Or maybe you are yet to start school so you can learn more? If you are yet to start school I apologise for calling you a retard.

Are you physically impaired, too?

[T.W.R]

And just to think the current road toll as of a few days ago was 363, which is 35 less than it was in 1962 when the speed limit was equivalent to 80km/h and the population was 2.4 million :pinch: They should be giving us a pat on the back for just a 10% increase yet the population has nearly doubled :whistle:

[Luckylegs]

you're a fuckwit


Your a retard because they are the only 3 words you know. Or maybe you are yet to start school so you can learn more? If you are yet to start school I apologise for calling you a retard.

You are a fuckwit - Anyone wanna go for five?

[george formby]

Soooo, while there is a Fuckwit fest going on above, why not contemplate this novel idea...

Stop focusing on speed and start focusing on retraining drivers every X years. We are the biggest problem, not speed or roads.

I've been an advocate of ongoing testing for a long time. When your licence expires sit a test to get it back.


Very spendy, though and a lot of folks don't like the idea.

[Blackbird]

How about not always laying blame at the door of the cops? I'm pretty sure that they have fairly limited powers to implement public policy. A few missiles fired in the direction of anonymous civil servants with hidden agendas might be better targets. :niceone:

[Luckylegs]

Soooo, while there is a Fuckwit fest going on above, why not contemplate this novel idea...

Stop focusing on speed and start focusing on retraining drivers every X years. We are the biggest problem, not speed or roads.

Or train em for the roads they're going to drive on. I live rural and I drive 70km's each way daily. Like all good kiwis (albeit I'm two thirds strayan, although shouldn't be admitting that here) I reckon i'm a pretty good driver, but regardless of whether this is true or not certainly I am comfortable on said roads at or above the speed limit simply through repetition (and experimentation). Quite simply idiots either obey the mantra or don't do it enough to get comfortable at speed and hence make mistakes when they do have to do it.

Ho-Hum, Probably impractical but why not allow the ability to be tested and licensed for particular roads or different speed limits? - Speed differential??? I'd say the driver, rider who has been proved able, deals with these as a matter of course and it's really not an issue. Hell, bump up my acc a couple of hundy to allow for the fact I might hurt myself a little more and i'd still be a pig in shit!

That's all - Not sure where a "thoughtful" post came from on a Saturday morning but hey....

[Moi]

How about not always laying blame at the door of the cops? I'm pretty sure that they have fairly limited powers to implement public policy. A few missiles fired in the direction of anonymous civil servants with hidden agendas might be better targets. :niceone:

The policy of enforcing speed limits is probably driven, and I'm assuming here, by the fact that speed can be "objectified" and presented in court as a "fact" - the speed camera indicated that the vehicle was travelling at 109km/h. I suspect that objectivity appeals to the civil servants.

Whereas, other aspects which lead to crashes such as "not driving safely in the conditions" are more subjective and are open to interpretation in a court.

[Akzle]

i've been over all of this before, and i'm sure so have y'all.


vote fucken akzle.

[pritch]

Not in our lifetime.
I have to agree with The Grand Tour (S2 E2) where they quite rightly point out the flaws in the computer systems that will make autonomous cars an absolute hazard.

Some of the people designing the system are poor drivers and that has been mentioned as a concern. Black people in the US of A have expressed concerns lest pedestrians are not recognised as such on dark nights. If that sounds odd remember the Tesla that killed its occupant (can't call him a driver) because it drove under a truck and trailer unit that was almost the same colour as the sky at the time.

[granstar]

And just to think the current road toll as of a few days ago was 363, which is 35 less than it was in 1962 when the speed limit was equivalent to 80km/h and the population was 2.4 million :pinch: They should be giving us a pat on the back for just a 10% increase yet the population has nearly doubled :whistle:

All finger pointing though, has anyone come up with factual statistics that make sense and pinpoint the real problems. I say it's driver/ rider impatience as a big factor. Example today a car following another (too close) oncoming pulled into my half of the road as the car in front indicated, slowed to turn off. Had that following driver read the road ( as I predictably- defensively did and slowed because it was obvious going to occur), been just a little fuckin patient for split seconds of his life, said driver would not have put all three cars and everyone else about in a horror crash situation.

[Akzle]

Nothing will change if the attitudes of some on here are anything to go by as they dont want tougher penalties for those with an "at fault" history. As nothing is going to change the best we can do to stay safe is to ditch our bikes and buy the biggest 4WD we can afford so the muppet that hits us comes off worse.

you're a fuckwit

[T.W.R]

All finger pointing though, has anyone come up with factual statistics that make sense and pinpoint the real problems. I say it's driver/ rider impatience as a big factor. Example today a car following another (too close) oncoming pulled into my half of the road as the car in front indicated, slowed to turn off. Had that following driver read the road ( as I predictably- defensively did and slowed because it was obvious going to occur), been just a little fuckin patient for split seconds of his life, said driver would not have put all three cars and everyone else about in a horror crash situation.

Ha it's the facts as pointed out by the powers that be :yes: their own numbers from historical records.
Patience doesn't register with peoples egos and attitudes...fact of life :oi-grr: Social conditioning has dumbed down the majority and they take no personal responsibility for their actions, self imposed arrogance in their wee self-centered bubbles.
I've just done a quick run to Rakaia and on the return following a bunch of vehicles popped past a few on a passing bay only to see ahead a blaze of tail lights and cars taking evasive action.....one dumb fuck towing a caravan decided to stop at the end of the passing bays on a partially blind rise with a large amount of oncoming vehicles :yes: ignorance is bliss to fuckwits with no consideration to others for what their actions may cause.

[granstar]

Nothing will change if the attitudes of some on here are anything to go by as they dont want tougher penalties for those with an "at fault" history. As nothing is going to change the best we can do to stay safe is to ditch our bikes and buy the biggest 4WD we can afford so the muppet that hits us comes off worse.

Huh! that is a bit heretic I must say (I said that), Bit harsh on the muppets :facepalm:
Yeah, go join a car forum.


Sorry got to go (for a ride), I have a life.

[Swoop]

Some of the people designing the system are poor drivers and that has been mentioned as a concern. Black people in the US of A have expressed concerns lest pedestrians are not recognised as such on dark nights. If that sounds odd remember the Tesla that killed its occupant (can't call him a driver) because it drove under a truck and trailer unit that was almost the same colour as the sky at the time.

I like Jeremy's suggestion of holding a baby, just to fuck up the algorithm of the cage's computer...

[crack]

It is a fact that since 1960's NZ population has doubled:

Our road toll in the 60's was circa 300+ or -.

Today the vehicles on our roads is more or less the same as our population:

Our road toll is still more or less the same, as it was in the 60's.:

I would say the safety campaign is working.

With more vehicles on the road we have not kept up with human performance, versus modernization of and advancing technologies:

There is a lot of hype over driver-less vehicles, and the government needs a working group to understand the issues of human performance versus technology.

A driver-less car/truck will avoid another driver-less car/truck, and it will rationalize and take out a person or another non driver-less vehicle if it has to choose,! it see's the non smart vehicle/person as the lesser.

As for driver-less cars/ trucks on NZ roads, our roads are different to alot of other places in the world being more windy/surrounded by hills, and not long straight interstates.

Having to deal with not only automated vehicles, but increasingly dumber humans with an increasingly poorer manipulation and driver thinking skills.

Imagine the Awakino gorge, or the Lewis or Lindus passes, or any number of NZ's main state highways, even south of the Bombays, just to name a couple.

If the vehicle looses its data signal, it has a programmed protocol to stop, now you and a line of traffic is stuck behind a 32 wheeler in a gorge until someone comes to move it! (how many times does your GPS loose signal?)

Sharing the roads with automated vehicles, and having manufacturers use the automated aviation industry as an example is misleading, and irresponsible to the road transportation industry, and not only wrong but misleading to say the least.

While two opposing airliners operating on auto-pilot, and on an airway! they routinely close on each other at speeds of over a 1000 knots plus!!, they are vertically separated by 1000- 2000 feet, and the passengers routinely carry on watching movies, drinking, sleeping, and arrive at their destination after using an industry that has become the safest means of transport world wide.

When aircraft are operating off airways and /or outside controlled airspace, if the automated systems (as in the above as well) recognize a aircraft as being at your level coming towards you, the systems in each talk to each other and then inform the crew of the appropriate resolution, to avoid a collision:

Now on the road in your 50 kph area, you are separated by a white line and a couple of meters at best:

Aviation has years of human factors training and routine standardized operating procedures and experience, and the biggest of all being standardized & legislated crew ongoing re-currency training:

There are countries around the world that will not let an airliner operate inside their boarders unless it is TCAS (terrain and collision avoidance systems equipped).

Driver-less vehicles with dumbed down human ability and poor practical skills, mixing it up with dumb vehicles and skilled drivers, is in my opinion for NZ roads a disaster in the making.

I would like to see what the New Zealand insurance council, and the transport ministry see's the issue:

(I reckon the insurance council will lower premiums for driver less vehicles, and boost premiums for human driven vehicles, under the guise that statistics prove the automated vehicles as being safer, but hang on??, how long and how many people/owners/countries have automation, and what recognized level of owner training does the insurance council adhere to? how does the insurance council make a decision that automation is safer, when the vast majority uses dumb vehicles, where and how can insurance and governments compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges, unless the playing field is level)

Road toll:

It is going to increase, I reckon dramatically so, and in the not too distant future.:scratch::scratch:

Chr's
Terry.

[george formby]

Much food for thought.

Happily, I'm not an early adopter.

[Laava]

I cant Wait for driverless bikes so I can sit on the back and get pissed.

[Woodman]

I cant Wait for driverless bikes so I can sit on the back and get pissed.

To be fair you can do that now.

[YellowDog]

Modern technology is negating the need for new drivers to have to learn basic skills or even understand cause and effect type physics.

There's no need to slow down or brake earlier, when it rains. Technology does it all for you.

The future = Higher speed accidents with more deaths.

[Laava]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

Dude its the fuckin holidays. Give it a rest.

[FJRider]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

Darwin had a theory ... a few of us hope it thin's out the gene pool ... <_<

You're still alive ... so we're not sure what to make of that ... :confused:


And it's not human error that does the damage ... it's human STUPID .. :shifty:

[OddDuck]

Stupid tends to expand until it's filled the available space.

The corollary is that people tend to start smartening up again once things are on the verge of going wrong, or just after things have gone sideways. That's been my experience anyway... Just human nature unfortunately... make things more forgiving, people very quickly get more stupid to match. Take the guardrails off and put spikes on instead and suddenly people start taking a bit more care. That isn't true if it's a well known and accepted risk. Then it just becomes business as usual.

That said, one of the best exercises that a non-biking person can do to become a better driver is to go from A to B on something that isn't a car. Take a pushbike. Take the bus. Shank's pony. Anything, just break the routine, get out of the car driver mindset.

[YellowDog]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

I don't agree with that, as your conclusion is for driverless vehicles, in order to remove the human error.

Technology attempts to compensate for common human error situations, on the road. However all this serves to do is to provide a false sense of security and the lives are now being lost in more dangerous situations, which may not have otherwise transpired.

My strong view is that: An error at 30kph, where modern technology prevents to the road user learning from the experience, so it is less likely to be repeated; can contribute to a death at 80kph.

I feel that technology contributes to human error crashes, as it has negated the need for road users to lean essential skills, so the errors are amplified at higher speeds, where the laws of physics can no longer be suppressed by technology.

So my conclusion is that, the implementation of the new technology is contributing towards lives being lost and should be restricted to advanced/experienced road users.

My new bike has: ABS, stability control, and Cruise control. It also has a USB socket, so that I can play Candy Crush at 250kph :no: So it's quite lucky that I have been riding for 40 years, or I wouldn't stand a chance.

[YellowDog]

I agree with you in part. The idea of putting screens to read in cars is a real dumb one as the screens become a distraction when viewed when moving. I remember maybe 20 - 30 years ago it was illegal to have a screen that could be viewed by the driver in a car. I do like however features like blind spot warning lights and from what I have read some cars have an auto braking function to prevent you rear ending someone should you be distracted in bumper to bumper traffic. Another feature that I read somewhere is that some cars can even read traffic light colours and stop you if its red. I read an article once that said everyone starts to slow down in their ability to react to situations happening on the road from the age of 45 and having experienced being driven by my father when he was in his 70s and 80s where his judgement ability had gone down in a big way the safety bells and whistles they are coming out with now can only be a good thing. Everyone slows down over time and for many they will never know unless someone tells them.

So I don't agree with most of that and feel they will contribute to the current carnage levels, however I believe you have now come up with the perfect use for these technological advances.

1. Very experienced road users, that are able to demonstrate their advanced skill levels.
2. Mentally and physically handicapped.
3. Oldies

BTW: My current 4 wheeled vehicle has web browsing and email, on a 8" screen, as well as all of the other crap. The pron can be off putting at 110kph :lol:

[pritch]

It is a fact that since 1960's NZ population has doubled:

Our road toll in the 60's was circa 300+ or -.



I'm pretty sure I can remember figures north of 600. Maybe even approaching 650?

That's a pretty big + or - from 300.

Thinking back to then we had the big booze barns with parking for 300 cars plus, and at 10.30PM everybody would pile into their cars and hit the road pissed. In retrospect it's a wonder the road toll wasn't even higher.

[Viking01]

I'm pretty sure I can remember figures north of 600, certainly figures approaching 600 were not uncommon.

That's a pretty big + or - from 300.

Thinking back to then we had the big booze barns with parking for 300 cars plus, and at 10.30PM everybody would pile into their cars and hit the road pissed. In retrospect it's a wonder the road toll wasn't even higher.


You are quite correct.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/roadtoll/annualroadtollhistoricalinformation/

[EJK]

You are quite correct.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/roadtoll/annualroadtollhistoricalinformation/

Very interesting stats. Either by population/ no of vehicles per capita road fatality has been dramatically been decreasing.

[Akzle]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

i see santa didn't bring you another braincell to keep that lonely one of yours company.

you're a fuckwit.

[pritch]

You are quite correct.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/roadtoll/annualroadtollhistoricalinformation/

I looked for that but couldn't find it. Peak toll was just shy of 800. Amazing! And not in a good way.

[Voltaire]

I'm pretty sure I can remember figures north of 600. Maybe even approaching 650?

That's a pretty big + or - from 300.

Thinking back to then we had the big booze barns with parking for 300 cars plus, and at 10.30PM everybody would pile into their cars and hit the road pissed. In retrospect it's a wonder the road toll wasn't even higher.

Darwins work was easier then as cars did not have other than seatbelts much in the way of safety features....

The road toll focus's on deaths, must be a lot of injured that thanks to airbags, crumple zones and giant leaps in medical

treatment that would be brown bread too.

[neil.]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

nah, I reckon it will get worse, as people rely on technology more, their own skills get worse, so when something does happen, they have no idea how to deal with it. I'm not even a fan of cruise control except for motorways, some folks seem to leave it on ALL the time, so i'm sure some crashes are due to going around corners at 100km/hr or more, with cruise control still on.

[caspernz]

It smells funny in here...again! That's what happens when you shovel clown shit I suppose :rolleyes:

[george formby]

BTW: My current 4 wheeled vehicle has web browsing and email, on a 8" screen, as well as all of the other crap. The pron can be off putting at 110kph :lol:

The Troll called you sport, again. In this instance spurt would have been betterer.

[Akzle]

Some on here say that many drivers and riders dont have any skills in the first place so they have no ability to get worse anyway.

some most on here say that you're a fuckwit so...

you're a fuckwit anyway.

[YellowDog]

Some on here say that many drivers and riders dont have any skills in the first place so they have no ability to get worse anyway.

The unaided by technology crap rider, may suffer a 50kph off, however at that speed, are less likely to kill themselves. Assuming ATGATT applies to said accident.

My point is that technology insulates them (and us) from their crap riding and means that they won't have that basic lack of skills accident until >80kph, or more, where they will be less likely to survive.

Hence: Vehicular enhancing technology is a killer, so it should therefore be restricted to already proven to be competent riders only.

Why able bodied car drivers are allowed to pass a driving test in an automatic transmission vehicle with ABS, beggars belief :tugger:

[onearmedbandit]

To be honest in my opinion this cop out of blaming 'technology' can be applied to the introduction of seatbelts, or disc brakes, collapsing steering columns or blah blah.

[pritch]

Like it or not sport you will be an oldie one day and that plus future advancing technology could mean the difference between taking the bus and still being able to drive.

There are problems with the technology. As has already been discussed on KB the designers of the system may be knowledgable about that technology, but some are demonstrably piss poor drivers. There is concern that they are building their pathetic driving into the system. How could it be otherwise?

When the guy was killed when his Tesla drove under a truck and trailer unit that it thought was the sky, Tesla spokespersons said you should not rely on the technology, you should stay in control at all times. Which sorta begs the point?

Then there's the people of colour in the US of A who are worried that the technology will not recognise them in the dark. That might sound funny but I haven't seen a statement from the company about that concern yet. There may have been one but...

[YellowDog]

To be honest in my opinion this cop out of blaming 'technology' can be applied to the introduction of seatbelts, or disc brakes, collapsing steering columns or blah blah.

Disc braking yes and also ABS too (both of which I might now struggle without), but far more so, Electronic Stability Control and Active Cruise Control.

There was a guy caught by a motorcyclist in the UK, reading a Kindle eBook whilst driving his car, with the aid of such technology. Though thoroughly deserved, Darwin's theories didn't even get a look in :no:

[granstar]

Some on here say that many drivers and riders dont have any skills in the first place so they have no ability to get worse anyway.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .....................................
334621

[Akzle]

At the end of the day it will be the insurance companies that will make the final call as to whether the technology is safe or not as if they decide no anyone that uses it will not be covered. The NZTA needs to take some responsibility for allowing any non proven technoliges on the road in the first place.

you're a fuckwit

[crack]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

Yes you are correct, but you are also wrong:



There are many cases where technology does not perform in times of crisis, something being unforeseen and:love: outside of its design, or an event happens outside the scope for which it is designed, and the humans have to intervene.

There are cases of humans not understanding the modern technology, and perfectly good equipment kills people through a lack of human training and understanding.

Manufacturers of technology put equipment into use, and at some point and time, something inevitably will happen/goes awry, and humans are left to sort it out, sometimes they get lucky, sometimes they perish.

This is perhaps the biggest issue with technology, is the testing of it in all known circumstances, its the unknown that killls you and then everyone all of a sudden becomes smart and designs a fix.

[crack]

I'm pretty sure I can remember figures north of 600. Maybe even approaching 650?

That's a pretty big + or - from 300.

Thinking back to then we had the big booze barns with parking for 300 cars plus, and at 10.30PM everybody would pile into their cars and hit the road pissed. In retrospect it's a wonder the road toll wasn't even higher.

I made my statement very loosely based upon memory and not research, and when I quoted the figures as I did, I new I was on safe ground with the plus or minus.

Sorry for a very loose quote, or the way in which I attempted to pass on information:

Please view the below.:done:


Historical deaths since 1921


Year Number of road deaths Year Number of road deaths Year Number of road deaths
1921 69 1953 313 1985 747
1922 61 1954 360 1986 766
1923 59 1955 333 1987 795
1924 94 1956 329 1988 727
1925 103 1957 384 1989 755
1926 149 1958 379 1990 729
1927 138 1959 349 1991 650
1928 176 1960 374 1992 646
1929 178 1961 393 1993 600
1930 246 1962 398 1994 580
1931 170 1963 394 1995 582
1932 168 1964 428 1996 514
1933 132 1965 559 1997 539
1934 169 1966 549 1998 501
1935 190 1967 570 1999 509
1936 203 1968 522 2000 462
1937 213 1969 570 2001 455
1938 243 1970 655 2002 405
1939 246 1971 677 2003 461
1940 205 1972 713 2004 435
1941 174 1973 843 2005 405
1942 164 1974 676 2006 393
1943 152 1975 628 2007 421
1944 142 1976 609 2008 366
1945 128 1977 702 2009 384
1946 191 1978 654 2010 375
1947 206 1979 554 2011 284
1948 196 1980 599 2012 308
1949 218 1981 669 2013 253
1950 232 1982 673 2014 293
1951 292 1983 644 2015 319
1952 272 1984 669 2016 327
Road deaths and reported injury casualties 1980 to 2016
Year Population (000) Vehicles (000) Road deaths Injuries
No. of fatalities Per 100,000 population Per 10,000 vehicles No. of injuries Per 100,000 population Per 10,000 vehicles
1980 3176.4 1789.4 599 18.9 3.3 15872 500 88.7
1981 3194.5 1848.6 669 20.9 3.6 15479 485 83.7
1982 3226.8 1882.5 673 20.9 3.6 16194 502 86.0
1983 3264.8 1917.4 644 19.7 3.4 16491 505 86.0
1984 3293.0 1968.9 669 20.3 3.4 17524 532 89.0
1985 3303.1 1996.1 747 22.6 3.7 18912 573 94.7
1986 3313.5 2010.1 766 23.1 3.8 18874 570 93.9
1987 3342.1 2030.6 795 23.8 3.9 18728 560 92.2
1988 3345.2 2045.4 727 21.7 3.6 17346 519 84.8
1989 3369.8 2108.4 755 22.4 3.6 16594 492 78.7
1990 3410.4 2197.7 729 21.4 3.3 17719 520 80.6
1991 3449.7 2220.1 650 18.8 2.9 16767 486 75.5
1992 3485.4 2227.1 646 18.5 2.9 16121 463 72.4
1993 3524.8 2243.8 600 17.0 2.7 15108 429 67.3
1994 3577.2 2289.3 580 16.2 2.5 16600 464 72.5
1995 3643.2 2354.6 582 16.0 2.5 16870 463 71.6
1996 3717.4 2379.8 514 13.8 2.2 14796 398 62.2
1997 3761.1 2392.7 539 14.3 2.3 13375 356 55.9
1998 3790.9 2440.4 501 13.2 2.1 12412 327 50.9
1999 3810.7 2512.3 509 13.4 2.0 11999 315 47.8
2000 3830.8 2601.7 462 12.1 1.8 10962 286 42.1
2001 3850.1 2633.2 455 11.8 1.7 12368 321 47.0
2002 3939.1 2709.5 405 10.3 1.5 13918 353 51.4
2003 4009.2 2801.0 461 11.5 1.6 14372 359 51.3
2004 4060.9 2920.7 435 10.7 1.5 13890 342 47.6
2005 4098.3 3030.4 405 9.9 1.3 14451 353 47.7
2006 4139.5 3124.3 393 9.5 1.3 15174 367 48.6
2007 4228.3 3189.1 421 10.0 1.3 16013 379 50.2
2008 4268.6 3247.8 366 8.6 1.1 15174 356 46.7
2009 4315.8 3220.3 384 8.9 1.2 14541 337 45.2
2010 4367.8 3230.6 375 8.6 1.2 14031 321 43.4
2011 4405.3 3233.6 284 6.4 0.9 12574 285 38.9
2012 4433.0 3250.1 308 6.9 0.9 12122 273 37.3
2013 4471.1 3304.7 253 5.7 0.8 11781 264 35.6
2014 4509.9 3398.1 293 6.5 0.9 11219 249 33.0
2015 4596.7 3514.8 319 6.9 0.9 12270 267 34.9
2016 4693.0 3656.3 327 7.0 0.9 12456 265 34.1

[Moi]

Just my opinion... technology in a vehicle, either a bike or a car, is like icing on a Christmas cake - it's really great to have that almond foundation and then the thick white icing on top of a moist and tasty fruit cake. But, if the cake underneath is dry and burnt the icing really doesn't save the day when Aunty May takes a bite and spits the cake on the Axminster carpet and looks as if she's been poisoned!

The technology in a car - airbags, ABS, ESC, ETC, EBA, etc - is the icing... the underlying fruit-cake is the driving skill of the driver. If their driving skill is such that the technology is along for the ride because it never gets used, then great. But if the technology is working overtime because the driver's skill is poor, then one day the driver will "spit the dummy onto the Axminster" when the technology can no longer overcome the forces of physics.

Those of us old enough to have learnt to drive in the days of cross-ply tyres, drum brakes, no power-assistance for anything, vacuum wipers and no heaters/demisters possibly have an advantage when driving over those who learnt to drive with "all the mod-cons" - we are less likely to rely on the technology to save the day as we probably don't get into the situation of "having to save the day".

Despite all the technology in my car, I tend to drive as if I am still driving Dad's Mk1 Cortina... very aware of the limitations it had with cross-ply tyres and absolutely no weight on the rear axle [solved with a small sack of scoria].

So what's this got to do with the death toll on NZ's roads? Again just my opinion, but I believe we as a nation need to have a serious look at what we are doing when we teach drivers and riders and what we are doing as on-going "PD" for drivers and riders who have held a licence for some time. Get the underlying skills right and maintain those skills, focus on the skills rather than just one action - speed.

[neels]

I watched an air crash investigation the other day, about the Air NZ airbus that crashed on test flight in france.

The root cause was dumb human shit causing sensors not to work, however the reason the aircraft crashed was that the pilots didn't recognise the point at which the technology on the aircraft couldn't figure out what to do, and it was time to take manual control and actually fly the thing themselves.

When doing something yourself ceases to be normal behaviour, and you rely on technology to do it for you, when the time comes that the technology fails the response is going to be much less effective....

Having fun at the moment teaching my son to drive vintage cars, he's learning the joy having none of the modern aids, what's most interesting is that there's a noticeable change in his driving after going back to basic principles of operating a motor vehicle.

[YellowDog]

I watched an air crash investigation the other day, about the Air NZ airbus that crashed on test flight in france.

The root cause was dumb human shit causing sensors not to work, however the reason the aircraft crashed was that the pilots didn't recognise the point at which the technology on the aircraft couldn't figure out what to do, and it was time to take manual control and actually fly the thing themselves.

When doing something yourself ceases to be normal behaviour, and you rely on technology to do it for you, when the time comes that the technology fails the response is going to be much less effective....

Having fun at the moment teaching my son to drive vintage cars, he's learning the joy having none of the modern aids, what's most interesting is that there's a noticeable change in his driving after going back to basic principles of operating a motor vehicle.

A few years back, an Air France A320 fell out of the sky, from 38,000ft, into the Atlantic. It was the then most advanced (safest) passenger plane in the world, being an Airbus A320. The cause must have been terrorism? Turns out that only one of the 8 pilots on the plane had any practical flying ability and he was sleeping off a night out with a new girlfriend. By the time he was showered and at the helm, it was too late.

I love technology, but I don't want to ever have to rely upon it totally (but of course I realise that we do so, in a lot of respects). My view is that drivers shouldn't be able to apply for a car licence until they have completed one year on a motorcycle. Of course some of them would not ever make to a car, but that might save a lot more of us too :yes:

[Moi]

...My view is that drivers shouldn't be able to apply for a car licence until they have completed one year on a motorcycle. Of course some of them would not ever make to a car, but that might save a lot more of us too :yes:

That sounds like the German approach to getting a licence...

[YellowDog]

That sounds like the German approach to getting a licence...

Must be a good approach then, as the Krauts are streets ahead of us here :yes:

[EJK]

That sounds like the German approach to getting a licence...

Nah, German way would be to gather up all the inferior drivers, slow drivers, Non-indicating tradies and rural farmers, old and senile, lane crossers, boy racers, and Asian tourists and put them in gas chambers.

Guaranteed to improve road safety.

[Swoop]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.
Technology has massively increased yet deaths still happen...

... and giant leaps in medical treatment...
Greatly overlooked component.

There is also no factoring in of Rescue Helicopter services. 1980's onwards?


... the underlying fruit-cake is the driving skill of the driver. Get the underlying skills right and maintain those skills, focus on the skills rather than just one action - speed.
Fuck. Someone here has it nailed. Right on the head!
Not that cockwombles in gubbinment or Donut-muncher head-honcho would ever realise.

Nah, German way would be to gather up all the inferior drivers, slow drivers, Non-indicating tradies and rural farmers, old and senile, lane crossers, boy racers, and Asian tourists and put them in gas chambers.

Guaranteed to improve road safety.
I don't see a problem there. Bring it on.
You missed "red light runners" though. Firing squad for those cunts!

[rastuscat]

So the best we have managed so far is 843 people killed in 1973.

Wouldn't be so bad if we could choose who they were. But no, it's just Mr and Mrs Average.

[Navy Boy]

I saw a really powerful advert on the TV last night. The one with the Policeman attending accidents, funerals and so on. It got the message across very effectively. That message being that your actions have consequences.

Imagine my disappointment then when the same old and tired punchline came back at the end of it. That is slow down and all will be OK.

What a shame that such a strong advert was spoiled by such an oversimplification.

It's enough to make you despair... :weird:

[Moi]

... You missed "red light runners" though. Firing squad for those cunts!

That's too quick...

What about a modern 21st century version of burning at the stake?

Tie them to post in the middle of an intersection to witness the crap driving until they finally perish...

And speaking of crap driving:

A few choice suggestions from an Aussie (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSJgrDjFsjY&list=PLnjhI4Ajj3UMDD5M1Tk7zQPr7gPKCRTfb)

You don't have to like the man, but the message is worth while.

[caspernz]

And speaking of crap driving:

A few choice suggestions from an Aussie (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSJgrDjFsjY&list=PLnjhI4Ajj3UMDD5M1Tk7zQPr7gPKCRTfb)

You don't have to like the man, but the message is worth while.

Aahhh yes, that John Cadogan fella has some pretty sound advice. But is his delivery PC enough for all the wowsers who don't understand plain English :eek::no::laugh:

[YellowDog]

Just a quick FYI regarding technology being forced upon us:

Phase 2 of the ESC requirements for used imported vehicles comes into effect March 1st 2018 in that all passenger vehicles class MA (that’s 'cars') with an engine of 2001 or more cc's will need to have ESC (Electronic Stability Control) fitted.


At least some of them have a switch, so you can learn to drive properly, without relying upon technology to cushion you from reality :yes:

[granstar]

I saw a really powerful advert on the TV last night. The one with the Policeman attending accidents, funerals and so on. It got the message across very effectively. That message being that your actions have consequences.

Imagine my disappointment then when the same old and tired punchline came back at the end of it. That is slow down and all will be OK.

What a shame that such a strong advert was spoiled by such an oversimplification.

It's enough to make you despair... :weird:

Missed point, distraction and careless driving is bigger than speed, how do you get the message to the government agency to take a look outside????


= Moi...So what's this got to do with the death toll on NZ's roads? Again just my opinion, but I believe we as a nation need to have a serious look at what we are doing when we teach drivers and riders and what we are doing as on-going "PD" for drivers and riders who have held a licence for some time. Get the underlying skills right and maintain those skills, focus on the skills rather than just one action - speed.

So what about the overseas visitor with obviously absolutely no driver skills as they weave all the way from Northland to Southland in their rental putting the shits up everyone?

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

[Swoop]

That's too quick...

What about a modern 21st century version of burning at the stake?
Being forced to read Miss Cassina's posts?:scratch:



A few choice suggestions from an Aussie

You don't have to like the man, but the message is worth while.

His recent explanation of Holden shutting down production, was rather entertaining...

[Moi]

Being forced to read Miss Cassina's posts?:scratch:

That's a cruel and unusual punishment...

[Moi]

... So what about the overseas visitor with obviously absolutely no driver skills as they weave all the way from Northland to Southland in their rental putting the shits up everyone?

In 2017 there were 379 deaths on our roads. How many were a result of an "overseas visitor with obviously absolutely no driver skills"?

I don't know where to find the answer to that question. However, I'd suggest that our own NZ drivers "with obviously absolutely no driver skills" caused more of those deaths than the overseas visitor. I, personally, see the "overseas driver can't drive" scenario as a red herring. We can't do too much about the overseas drivers, but we certainly can do something about our own home-grown drivers.

[caspernz]

In 2017 there were 379 deaths on our roads. How many were a result of an "overseas visitor with obviously absolutely no driver skills"?

I don't know where to find the answer to that question. However, I'd suggest that our own NZ drivers "with obviously absolutely no driver skills" caused more of those deaths than the overseas visitor. I, personally, see the "overseas driver can't drive" scenario as a red herring. We can't do too much about the overseas drivers, but we certainly can do something about our own home-grown drivers.

Sounds about right. Why would we improve the skills (dare I say attitude?) of our own driver pool, when we can just keep pointing the finger at them overseas visitors? Oh right, it's really just the media creating that storm in a teacup...:laugh::eek:

[Ocean1]

So the best we have managed so far is 843 people killed in 1973.

Wouldn't be so bad if we could choose who they were. But no, it's just Mr and Mrs Average.

Charles Darwin would like a word.

[crack]

Nah, German way would be to gather up all the inferior drivers, slow drivers, Non-indicating tradies and rural farmers, old and senile, lane crossers, boy racers, and Asian tourists and put them in gas chambers.

Guaranteed to improve road safety.

Du bist eine schändliche und bigotte Person.

eine Person mit sehr geringer Intelligenz (IQ von 25 bis 50), die normalerweise nur in der Lage ist, sich vor Gefahren zu schützen und einfache mechanische Aufgaben unter Aufsicht auszuführen. 2. (informell) eine extrem dumme Person; Tölpel Adjektiv. 3. oder wie ein Schwachsinniger; schwachsinnig; schwachsinnig. 4. dumm oder sinnlos: ein :bash:...

[EJK]

Du bist eine schändliche und bigotte Person.

eine Person mit sehr geringer Intelligenz (IQ von 25 bis 50), die normalerweise nur in der Lage ist, sich vor Gefahren zu schützen und einfache mechanische Aufgaben unter Aufsicht auszuführen. 2. (informell) eine extrem dumme Person; Tölpel Adjektiv. 3. oder wie ein Schwachsinniger; schwachsinnig; schwachsinnig. 4. dumm oder sinnlos: ein :bash:...

I can think of a scene from Pulp Fiction.

[caspernz]

I can think of a scene from Pulp Fiction.

Sprechen sie deutsch mein herr? Ich bin ja nur ein eisenbahnknotenpunkthinundherschieber...:rolleyes:

That scene must be the "be cool hunny bunny" one :Oi::devil2:

[EJK]

Being forced to read Miss Cassina's posts?:scratch:

You went over the line mister!

[Berries]

So what about the overseas visitor with obviously absolutely no driver skills as they weave all the way from Northland to Southland in their rental putting the shits up everyone?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBfVnEdoTHI
I am struggling to see what part of that video showed that the driver had absolutely no skills. Seems to me he was on the wrong side of the road through mistakenly forgetting where he was which has fuck all to do with skills. I am sure many of us have done that. Hands up, I did it somewhere north of Milan once.

Perhaps if Margaret and Trevor weren't cutting the 45km/h corner the other driver would have seen them earlier and realised his mistake and either got back on the correct side of the road or scrubbed off a bit more speed. If I was being picky.

This is the reality of whoring the country for the tourist dollar though, you can't have it both ways.

[crack]

I am struggling to see what part of that video showed that the driver had absolutely no skills. Seems to me he was on the wrong side of the road through mistakenly forgetting where he was which has fuck all to do with skills. I am sure many of us have done that. Hands up, I did it somewhere north of Milan once.

Perhaps if Margaret and Trevor weren't cutting the 45km/h corner the other driver would have seen them earlier and realised his mistake and either got back on the correct side of the road or scrubbed off a bit more speed. If I was being picky.

This is the reality of whoring the country for the tourist dollar though, you can't have it both ways.

Well said indeed,I agree.

[YellowDog]

So what about the overseas visitor with obviously absolutely no driver skills as they weave all the way from Northland to Southland in their rental putting the shits up everyone?

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

Looked like a lone driver. Not going fast and clearly trying to avoid a collision. Couldn't understand what was going on :o

I did that in Italy once on a country road. Turned right off a main road and instinctively set myself on the left side. Realised quickly enough, but it's quite worrying.

[crack]

Missed point, distraction and careless driving is bigger than speed, how do you get the message to the government agency to take a look outside????



So what about the overseas visitor with obviously absolutely no driver skills as they weave all the way from Northland to Southland in their rental putting the shits up everyone?

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

I am:

While I agree the road toll is trending down, with some logic I agree that the NZ police need a vessel to carry their message, then I guess speeding is the most suitable, as the police say that excessive speed is the main cause of death:

When I think of excessive speed I imagine some young goon in his/her $3000 twin turbo Japanese import doing 240 kph.

BUT! Excessive speed applies to speed limits and driving to the conditions what ever the speed limit, or physical conditions that need to be met with driver awareness and caution.

Deaths are not just caused by for example, doing 50kph through a 20pkh area, when a hypothetical worker steps out and you clean him/her up because you cant stop, or doing 50kph in a 50kph area in the wet, going around a corner a bit quick with some unknown spillage on the road, and you loose it and clean up some person to your right! or maybe its you on your bike and you whack your head on the curb on your way down, ni ni nurse.

Or as in the above example you are doing 300 kph on your Hyabusa and a tractor pulls out of a farm gate, and cuts the tractor in half and the rider disintegrates, the farmer doesn't have a mark on him, but is traumatized by the carnage, "but hey the services are used to cleaning it up".

I know of a few on here, in the Ambo, Fire, & Police service.

They get to pick up the body parts, load the survivors, hose out or away what cant be picked up, then go home to their loved ones, it takes a toll.

Yes I agree that they (the police) could cover/advertise driver issues of Fatigue, Lack of Patience, Dis courteous behaviors, etc etc, but with adds of drink driving, and drug driving, and speeding, (thats 3 sets of adds) thinking economics it becomes expensive to get the message out there to all, so when I think of the speeding campaign, as much as I am sick of the harping on about it, I guess bang for buck, its not doing too bad:

One of my dislikes is the police attitude to speeding, IE towing my tandem trailer at 96kph, a cop coming towards me in a line of traffic on the desert road, hits the brakes, lights, siren, u turns sharply, and accelerates like a absolute goon to pull me over for a 6kph infringement. ( this was not a safe action)

Very recently my old mate got cleaned up by a Woman police officer in a car, coming towards him, while a hoon in a boy racing machine speed past him, she hits the brakes, lights, siren and you guessed it, U- turns in front of him on a state highway, he is currently in rehabilitation having been without his Christmas with his family:

Their is a strong lack of Human Factors training and understanding in our Police, (and DHBs, Local and central Govts,).

As much as I have complained about the harping on, I will put up with it.

[Swoop]

You went over the line mister!
Oops, forgot about those bastards who cannot stay to the left of the center line.

Poison injections, whilst reading Miss Cassina's posts, and being beaten with a brick.

[Akzle]

Nah, German way would be to gather up all the inferior drivers, slow drivers, Non-indicating tradies and rural farmers, old and senile, lane crossers, boy racers, and Asian tourists and put them in gas chambers.

Guaranteed to improve road safety.
vote akzle

Just a quick FYI regarding technology being forced upon us:

Phase 2 of the ESC requirements for used imported vehicles comes into effect March 1st 2018 in that all passenger vehicles class MA (that’s 'cars') with an engine of 2001 or more cc's will need to have ESC (Electronic Stability Control) fitted.


At least some of them have a switch, so you can learn to drive properly, without relying upon technology to cushion you from reality :yes:
buy my magna bro

[caspernz]

Oops, forgot about those bastards who cannot stay to the left of the center line.

Poison injections, whilst reading Miss Cassina's posts, and being beaten with a brick.

The important question is do I get to choose the colour of the brick? :angry2::angry2:

[EJK]

...They are certainly no better than any one else in driving ability.

Why don't you send your CV to NZ Police and apply for chief driving instructor? I'm sure they'd be interested with your expertise and experience. :yes:

[Akzle]

The police u turn thing without looking appears to be very common thing as I was in a car myself that was almost hit by a police car doing a u turn. Maybe when a police officer does a u turn into a big truck without looking and comes off worse they will then start looking before attenpting u turns. They are certainly no better than any one else in driving ability.

you're a fuckwit

why do you waste time (everyone elses, yours is fucking worthless) posting the same shit, over and over again, in many and varied and entirely irrelevant threads, only to be shot down by everyone else, over and over again?

[Akzle]

Why don't you send your CV to NZ Police and apply for chief driving instructor? I'm sure they'd be interested with your expertise and experience. :yes:

or it could at least get an acting bit on one of their ads as a brain damaged cunt.

[caspernz]

or it could at least get an acting bit on one of their ads as a brain damaged cunt.

Only if the auditions are of the lucky kind though :eek::Police:

[Akzle]

It would be interesting to see how many i would fail especially with the U turn test. I would hope it would not be the majority but with so many cases reported in the media of dangerous police U turns it could be quite a few. The most publisised police U turn crash was some years back where 1 possibly 2 motorcyclists were killed. Any of us could be killed in the next police U turn crash.

you're a fuckwit

[RDJ]

Why don't you send your CV to NZ Police and apply for chief driving instructor? I'm sure they'd be interested with your expertise and experience. :yes:

Nah, I think she should take Chris Cahill's job over.

[Swoop]

Their is a strong lack of Human Factors training and understanding in our Police, (and DHBs, Local and central Govts,).

You might enjoy reading this: Sarah Cowie: Incentives for good driving could work a treat.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11972101

Yes, sadly it comes from the Harold, but the writer has some credentials and valid points. Not that the gubbinment or police hierarchy will acknowledge these salient points.

[Akzle]

You might enjoy reading this: Sarah Cowie: Incentives for good driving could work a treat.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11972101

Yes, sadly it comes from the Harold, but the writer has some credentials and valid points. Not that the gubbinment or police hierarchy will acknowledge these salient points.

yeah nah. she does that thing where she equates " not exceeding the posted limit" with "driving safely"

[Navy Boy]

You might enjoy reading this: Sarah Cowie: Incentives for good driving could work a treat.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11972101

Yes, sadly it comes from the Harold, but the writer has some credentials and valid points. Not that the gubbinment or police hierarchy will acknowledge these salient points.

An interesting article and nice to see an alternative take on the current form of law enforcement.