Road toll - Police stupid obsession blaming speed

[Swoop]

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

Oddly that article seemed to have upset someone at the Harold, since I attempted to post the link but the entire article had disappeared. Lots of searches wouldn't show it again, but later in the day it re-surfaced.
"Officialdom" not taking kindly to a differing point of view?

[crack]

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

A well written article:

Fines linked to earnings, and idea!

No results from the Fin's, no reduction in the NZ numbers of fines issued!

Yet! Undeniably something is working as the toll is trending down, (for now anyway).

[Swoop]

Fines linked to earnings, and idea!

Actually a stupid idea.
It would, once again, be a tax on the middle classes. The wealthy would have their accountants deal with it or have the family trust in place, so their earnings would be essentially zero.

It sounds so stupid Liarbour will definitely put it in place.

[Ocean1]

Actually a stupid idea.
It would, once again, be a tax on the middle classes. The wealthy would have their accountants deal with it or have the family trust in place, so their earnings would be essentially zero.

It sounds so stupid Liarbour will definitely put it in place.

The politics of envy. The objective isn't road safety, it's punishing rich pricks for being rich. Definitely a growing trend too, we've already got dramatically increased subsidies for "underprivileged" breeding, housing and health care.

The fact that it doesn't work is beside the point. I read a piece a couple weeks ago that demonstrated that the first year's free tertiary education "initiative" is going to benefit far more higher income families simply because they'll take advantage of it. The whole theory that lower income families' kids are disadvantaged through lack of higher education is based on the assumption that the reason for it is the already 80% subsidised cost of that education.

[crack]

Actually a stupid idea.
It would, once again, be a tax on the middle classes. The wealthy would have their accountants deal with it or have the family trust in place, so their earnings would be essentially zero.

It sounds so stupid Liarbour will definitely put it in place.

Are we not lucky we live in NZ and can debate such.

Stupid is as stupid does:

Maybe you could define reason and objectivity! as for National/Liarbour ( I guess you meant to spell it this way)why not do away with the party system, people stand get elected, then the elected go into a cave and elect a leader, if not done within a week, they are all fired and the process starts again:


Why not euthanasia all the rich, all the poor, all the politicians, all the lawyers, all the bankers, all the police, all academics, all the elderly, the sick, all the drug addicts, all that drain our taxes!

Heck why not just do away with society and its rules?

Shit if we're really lucky the Don might yet level the sphere, and we can all start again from cockroaches!

Yep I too can come up with stupid .

(as long as Im last man standing)

Now as for speeding, ( speeding, in a hurry, being impatient), the young Blond Witch in a blue NIssan at the intersection of Fitzherbert ave and college street yesterday afternoon:

I proceeded across the intersection on a Green light, she run a red, turning right, (to my left) if I had not hit the brakes my left hand truck light would have been in her left hand door, seated beside which was a blond girl aged about 3-4, not in a car seat, when I hit the horn, she flips me the bird!
And these things breed and live among us!
Do the kid a favor and give her to someone that deserves and will love her, the mother I presume, take out to the bush and double tap her behind the ear.:ar15:

[Akzle]

do away with the party system, people stand get elected, then the elected go into a cave and elect a leader, if not done within a week, they are all fired and the process starts again:


Why not euthanasia all the rich, all the poor, all the politicians, all the lawyers, all the bankers, all the police, all academics, all the elderly, the sick, all the drug addicts, all that drain our taxes!

Heck why not just do away with society and its rules?
ar15:

vote akzle

[YellowDog]

Shit if we're really lucky the Don might yet level the sphere, and we can all start again from cockroaches!


Welcome to The Green Party. You know it makes sense :shit:

[crack]

Welcome to The Green Party. You know it makes sense :shit:

process all the dead people into Green Food Pills, and feed to the populace, reminiscent of that political movie "Soylent Green".

I am 17 years past my "Carousel" date.

[Swoop]

Liarbour ( I guess you meant to spell it this way)

You're new around here...

[rastuscat]

Vote Azkill

[Voltaire]

Dear Police,

If your going to be involved in dumb TV programs like Road Cops or Highway Patrol, hire some actors who come across as Jake

the Muss instead of the soft cock ones you use.

Caught a couple of mins where a cop had pulled over what was clearly a WOF failure car.

It was an unregistered " paddock basher" and the woman driver had a suspended licence.

Nice cop gave her a wet bus ticket telling off and followed her back to the farm.

Should have read the riot act at stupid had her car scrapped and got someone else to pick her up.

[EJK]

Dear Police,

If your going to be involved in dumb TV programs like Road Cops or Highway Patrol, hire some actors who come across as Jake

the Muss instead of the soft cock ones you use.

Caught a couple of mins where a cop had pulled over what was clearly a WOF failure car.

It was an unregistered " paddock basher" and the woman driver had a suspended licence.

Nice cop gave her a wet bus ticket telling off and followed her back to the farm.

Should have read the riot act at stupid had her car scrapped and got someone else to pick her up.

Saw that episode. Had a good laugh.

[VFR400R]

Anybody else here the radio this morning where some guy said "motorcyclists over 40 should have to re-sit their test once a year." This following the 13th serious bike accident in 2018.

I think it was the breeze playing in the physio this morning (Yep over 40 and dropped my bike front end slide Nov last year first time in 25 years...body does not bounce back like it once did...been riding the whole time too :( )

[Voltaire]

Anybody else here the radio this morning where some guy said "motorcyclists over 40 should have to re-sit their test once a year." This following the 13th serious bike accident in 2018.

I think it was the breeze playing in the physio this morning (Yep over 40 and dropped my bike front end slide Nov last year first time in 25 years...body does not bounce back like it once did...been riding the whole time too :( )

Its good that people who have done lots of research and study into motorcycle crashs take time out of t ring up radio stations and share their extensive knowledge, much like the news where they interview a random neighbour or passer by for their insightful comments.


Said caller is probably a fantastic driver who never tailgates,speeds, makes poor overtaking choices or uses phone whilst driving and so on.

[T.W.R]

Said caller is probably a fantastic driver who never tailgates,speeds, makes poor overtaking choices or uses phone whilst driving and so on.

The said caller was probably doing at least two of the above whilst calling the radio station :whistle:

[russd7]

probably find its in relation to this article by this dickhead
http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=262860

[Akzle]

Some on here will embrace what he wants to do as they have a belief that going to a riding school will make them a better rider. My solution to the problem is to whack all those with an "at fault" history higher ACC premiums.

you're a fuckwit. just. such a fuckwit.

what happened to you going away for a while.

[T.W.R]

probably find its in relation to this article by this dickhead
http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=262860

The same cock jockey that did this

https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjKt_67sOvYAhUMgLwKHZcYA6MQFgg5MAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stuff.co.nz%2Fmotoring%2Fblog s%2Fdrivetalk%2F1878250%2FSafety-expert-loses-the-plot-and-500&usg=AOvVaw08YEVgXrhOntNub_RUVzuX

[granstar]

Some on here will embrace what he wants to do as they have a belief that going to a riding school will make them a better rider. My solution to the problem is to whack all those with an "at fault" history higher ACC premiums.

"Some"...presumptuous...

It won't happen your solution is dumb and not worth any consideration, besides powers that be in parliament won't listen, Mr Wilson is a motorcycle hater and should be ignored.

There are learners out there who have had no fault history, there are riders who have not ridden since their teens and getting back into biking middle age, also no fault, and there is the likes of me who has ridden daily since 1972 on mostly large capacity machine and also had no fault yet pay high premium (on 3 of 5 bikes I own) albeit unfair I enjoy my bikes and will pay the going price. So when you say "at fault" how do you define that where there is a broad subject of human mistake of the poor fuckers who had a bad day. So many variables in crashes that statistics dept cannot pinpoint other than blame speed with now advertising more aptly that less speed = less carnage (debatable). How about a bit of reward for good behaviour, again won't happen, its coffers revenue.

Attending any riding course, defensive driving whatever WILL make you a better rider, how can it not? If you only learn one thing it is better than nothing, the ride to and fro alone is gaining more experience, please engage noodle TYVM.

[Woodman]

So you would prefer compulsary riding schools to those at fault having to pay more despite never being at fault yourself?

I do because the riding schools will prevent accidents (not all, so shut the fuck up) whereas your suggestion is classic ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.

[Voltaire]

Perhaps its time for an overhaul of ACC not unlike WorkSafe.

I have notices a lot of bad practices in the building industry that I hated for years yet nothing was done have now changed.

I too object to the double dip approach of paying for multiple vehicles.

But then again I also advocate compulsory insurance and a higher standard of protective gear.

I saw a Motorcyclist heading up SH 1 on a busy section just north of the bridge lanesplitting at speed on his straight thru piped

Harley with forward pegs and hiiiiiiigh bars, shorts, trainers, t shirt and German helmet and pondered how much he would cost

to " patch" up if he thru no fault of his own came to grief. My wife pondered out loud but used less printable language.

[Moi]

probably find its in relation to this article by this dickhead
http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=262860

His opening paragraph states:
"The rising number of motorbike deaths and injuries has prompted a call for urgent action to either restrict access to motorbikes or have compulsory retesting for drivers, a car review website says."

Has prompted an urgent call from whom?

Has anyone seen, read or heard of this "call for urgent action"?

Perhaps I missed it in the public notices of the Herald...

[Moi]

"Some"...presumptuous...

It won't happen your solution is dumb and not worth any consideration, besides powers that be in parliament won't listen, Mr Wilson is a motorcycle hater and should be ignored.

There are learners out there who have had no fault history, there are riders who have not ridden since their teens and getting back into biking middle age, also no fault, and there is the likes of me who has ridden daily since 1972 on mostly large capacity machine and also had no fault yet pay high premium (on 3 of 5 bikes I own) albeit unfair I enjoy my bikes and will pay the going price. So when you say "at fault" how do you define that where there is a broad subject of human mistake of the poor fuckers who had a bad day. So many variables in crashes that statistics dept cannot pinpoint other than blame speed with now advertising more aptly that less speed = less carnage (debatable). How about a bit of reward for good behaviour, again won't happen, its coffers revenue.

Attending any riding course, defensive driving whatever WILL make you a better rider, how can it not? If you only learn one thing it is better than nothing, the ride to and fro alone is gaining more experience, please engage noodle TYVM.




So you would prefer compulsory riding schools to those at fault having to pay more despite never being at fault yourself?

Where in what granstar wrote does he say "compulsory"?

[Moi]

if you read the article from the link that was posted the article suggests making riding school compulsory. To not agree with my idea of making those at fault pay higher ACC premiums gives me the impression he would prefer compulsory riding school. Maybe a poll needs to be taken on here as to which of the 2 most desire. It would likely go in favour of compulsory riding school from the majority of posts from riding school fans on here.

Please re-submit your assignment...

Wrong!

You quoted what granstar had written and attempted to imply that he had suggested that riding schools should be compulsory [please note correct spelling of compulsory]. Granstar did not suggest compulsory riding schools, he did suggest that attending a riding school may improve a rider's riding.

You are the one with the fixation on:
1. charging higher ACC "premiums" to those "at fault"
2. misunderstanding that ACC is not an insurance and does not charge premiums but "levies" people as that is required by its regulations
3. a fixation on riding schools

It was the article that suggested compulsory riding schools.

[Banditbandit]

His opening paragraph states:
"The rising number of motorbike deaths and injuries has prompted a call for urgent action to either restrict access to motorbikes or have compulsory retesting for drivers, a car review website says."

Has prompted an urgent call from whom?

Has anyone seen, read or heard of this "call for urgent action"?

Perhaps I missed it in the public notices of the Herald...

Journalistic licence - the licence is easier to get than a driver's licence ..

[Akzle]

if you read the article from the link that was posted the article suggests making riding school compulsory. To not agree with my idea of making those at fault pay higher ACC premiums gives me the impression he would prefer compulsary riding school. Maybe a poll needs to be taken on here as to which of the 2 most desire. It would likely go in favour of compulsary riding school from the majority of posts from riding school fans on here.

it would go that way because you're the only 100% fuckwit.

[Banditbandit]

The reason why no one else but me on here does not want higher premiums for those at fault is simply because they are too frightened of being at fault themselves. If riding schools were so good they would not have that fear now would they????

Oh piss off - that is stupid. The reason why I don't want a higher premium is that it simply does not work ..

We get fined for speeding - a fault-payment linked system. That never stopped me speeding ... It just makes me more aware of the popo - and tempts my to buy a radar detector (as many have). The fine system has not stopped people speeding .. a higher premium ACC for riders at fault will have bugger all impact.

Compulsory riding schools are highly unlikely to work either ... and could even have the effect of making people over-confident.

If you force people to go to school they will not learn - they will simply do the time ... with no impact at all.

What needs to change is rider attitude - and fines or compulsory training will have no impact - peer pressure is what has changed our attitudes about drink-driving ...

But that is not likely to work in this case either - My attitude is total resistance - good luck with any efforts to change that.

You can fuck off ..

[Akzle]

The reason why no one else but me on here wants higher premiums for those at fault is simply because they are too frightened of being at fault themselves. If riding schools were so good they would not have that fear now would they????

you're a fuckwit

[Akzle]

You will never know if a fault based ACC premium structure works untill its tried though. I have read also that going to riding school can make some riders feel overconfident and in the article I read that was the reason why the govt at the time did not want to make riding school compulsory. You could say many of the coments from riding school grads on here do actually demonstrate over confidence which respect to their perceived belief thay can avoid the screwups of others. The fact you have said to fuck off just demonstrates your fear of being found at fault!!!

you're a fuckwit

[Moi]

Journalistic licence - the licence is easier to get than a driver's licence ..

Gosh! You are being polite about it...

I thought it was due to applied wankery by the author of the article, and piss-poor applied wankery to boot...

[Moi]

The reason why no one else but me on here wants higher premiums for those at fault is simply because they are too frightened of being at fault themselves. If riding schools were so good they would not have that fear now would they????

Report to cassina's parents:

English: cassina needs to read what is written and to attempt to comprehend what is written. cassina's outbursts in class about "at fault" and "not at fault" and "premiums" in relation to ACC clearly shows that cassina has little grasp of the topic being discussed and debated.

[Akzle]

Report to cassina's parents:

English: cassina needs to read what is written and to attempt to comprehend what is written. cassina's outbursts in class about "at fault" and "not at fault" and "premiums" in relation to ACC clearly shows that cassina has little grasp of the topic being discussed and debated.

which wasn't actually the topic being discussed, but is one of 3 things that it knows, and keeps repeating. ad nauseum, despite what everyone else was actually talking about.

[Banditbandit]

Y. The fact you have said to fuck off just demonstrates your fear of being found at fault!!!



When I am at fault I admit it - I'm not perfect.

I pay the fine when I get caught - and don't complain ... I did it - I got caught - I paid the penalty. Does not affect my behavior though ... I still speed - every day I'm riding.

I have never made a claim on ACC for a bike accident - maybe I should have but sick leave covered it .. twice cars have pulled out in front of me - the rest of the time I did it myself ... but did not need or claim ACC ... would higher premiums affect my behavior on the road? No ...

You say a fault based system has never been tried - so how do we know it would not work? There are elements of a fault-based system in the current model - dangerous occupations, such as Forestry, pay higher premiums - does that affect the industry? Just look at the increase in recent deaths in the forestry ... not even any changes. If anything employers are more lax about safety now than they were five years ago ..

The higher premiums on motorcycles is partly a fault-based system - has it improved on the roads? Not even ...

If forestry employers and those in other dangerous occupations and motorcycle riders took more care and had fewer accidents the premiums would go down .. the fact that there have been the same or more accidents shows money-based incentives do not work.

[caseye]

She's a fuckwit, end of story.

[granstar]

I do because the riding schools will prevent accidents (not all, so shut the fuck up) whereas your suggestion is classic ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.

Exactly :facepalm: All about personal attitude to survival on a bike and respect for other road users.

[granstar]

You will never know if a fault based ACC premium structure works untill its tried though. I have read also that going to riding school can make some riders feel overconfident and in the article I read that was the reason why the govt at the time did not want to make riding school compulsory. You could say many of the coments from riding school grads on here do actually demonstrate over confidence which respect to their perceived belief thay can avoid the screwups of others. The fact you have said to fuck off just demonstrates your fear of being found at fault!!!

Fucksake, go do a course yourself and find out for yourself (I have), reading something somewhere and then blabbing on about it as if you are an expert has no credit and it just leaves Akzle stuck on his record albeit true. Do a course and report back about how many are over confident, I suggest you won't find any but we need the facts and not just some Coronation Street gossip. TY.

[Moi]

You and a few others just attack my ideas because you are jealous you can't think up anything better yourself. Maybe you would have some credibility if as well as attacking my idea you responded with an idea of your own. Or are you just fearful your idea would be attacked by others as well?

I do not attack your ideas, I critique your ideas - big difference...

Jealous of what you say? - no.

I'd suggest you do a bit of a search and you might well find I have made suggestions that could assist others...

Fearful? No.

[Moi]

... You [meaning cassina] say a fault based system has never been tried - so how do we know it would not work? ...

Why do we have ACC?

Because the previous system, which was basically a "fault based system" was failing. If you were injured you had to prove that the other party was at fault and their "fault" had caused your injury. For many to do such was beyond their means and so they missed out accessing any form of compensation for their injury.

If you, I mean cassina, think that a "fault based system" would be better, then I suggest you go to the USA and see how well such a system works there...

[granstar]

Why do we have ACC?


If you, I mean cassina, think that a "fault based system" would be better, then I insist you go to the USA and see how well such a system works there...

Have changed that for you....:msn-wink:


334879

[FJRider]

The reason why no one else but me on here wants higher premiums for those at fault is simply because they are too frightened of being at fault themselves. If riding schools were so good they would not have that fear now would they????

Find anybody that has been to a riding school ... that says it was a complete waste of time ... ;)

[FJRider]

You and a few others just attack my ideas because you are jelous you cant think up anything better yourself. Maybe you would have some credibility if as well as attacking my idea you responded with an idea of your own. Or are you just fearfull your idea would be attacked by others as well?

We attack your ideas because we think you're a fuckwit.

[FJRider]

Some on here will embrace what he wants to do as they have a belief that going to a riding school will make them a better rider. My solution to the problem is to whack all those with an "at fault" history higher ACC premiums.

The cash cow that are speed cameras ... proves fines alone do not change peoples attitude to speed. Regardless of their financial or ethnic standing ... <_<


If ALL traffic fines owed to NZ Courts were paid ... the Government could afford to relax the motorcycle levies ... (almost) <_<

And ... ACC do not have premiums ... you cannot buy ACC "Cover". For any individual persons ACC vehicle levy to be either increased or reduced ... cannot be done under the current vehicle registration legislation. The levy is attached in the vehicles licensing system ... not to any particular named person.

[FJRider]

I agree with you the premium on motorbikes is fault based but is the fault being applied to the mode of transport and not drivers/riders fair though?

It is not a premium ... it is a levy ... :shifty:

It is NOT FAULT based ... it is RISK based ... :rolleyes:

Motorcyclists are seen (By ACC) as being more at RISK ... not more at FAULT. More CAR drivers are at fault in accidents than motorcyclists ... but they pay lower levy's ... explain why that is .. ??? :shifty:

[granstar]

It is not a premium ... it is a levy ... :shifty:

It is NOT FAULT based ... it is RISK based ... :rolleyes:

Motorcyclists are seen (By ACC) as being more at RISK ... not more at FAULT. More CAR drivers are at fault in accidents than motorcyclists ... but they pay lower levy's ... explain why that is .. ??? :shifty:

As a twattling ultracrepidarian I don't think it can.

[Akzle]

You and a few others just attack my ideas because you are jelous you cant think up anything better yourself. Maybe you would have some credibility if as well as attacking my idea you responded with an idea of your own. Or are you just fearfull your idea would be attacked by others as well?

you're a fuckwit

[Akzle]

We attack your ideas because we think you're a fuckwit.

i don't even attack it's ideas. just it. there's no point, because it only has 3 ideas.

it's a fuckwit and well beyond any kind of reasoned discussion. i could rebutt it on a point by point basis, but then it would just repeat what it's already said a thousand times (even if what it says has been debunked previously) and i'm just not that much of a masochist.

[FJRider]

You are being semantical as to whether its called a premium or a levy the cost remains the same but if you feel by calling it a levy makes you feel better all the best.

By definition ... you're a ...

Fuckwit ... :a stupid or contemptible person (often used as a general term of abuse). (look it up if you don't believe me ... :doh:

An insurance premium is the amount of money that an individual or business must pay for an insurance policy. The insurance premium is considered income by the insurance company once it is earned, and also represents a liability in that the insurer must provide coverage for claims being made against the policy.




Levy: impose (a tax, fee, or fine).
"a tax of two per cent was levied on all cargoes"
synonyms: impose, charge, exact, demand, raise, collect, gather;


noun

an act of levying a tax, fee, or fine.
"police forces receive 49 per cent of their funding via a levy on the rates"
synonyms: tax, tariff, toll, excise, duty, fee, imposition, impost, exaction, assessment, tithe, payment; More

[FJRider]

I still think you are a semantical fuckwit,

Semantical is not an English word. Semantic is. Buy a dictionary. Is English your 2nd (or 3rd) language .. ???

There are more on here that think you are a fuckwit than I. So we must be correct.

[Viking01]

Some on here will embrace what he wants to do as they have a belief that going to a riding school will make them a better rider. My solution to the problem is to whack all those with an "at fault" history higher ACC premiums.

You've been pushing this "increased ACC levy" policy for quite some time,
and you've had plenty of time to develop your thinking. But I 'm still none
the wiser what you're trying to achieve:

- To further penalise a rider (or driver) due to their being responsible for more
than one "at fault" accident,
or
- To increase the provision within the ACC funds for personal injury treatment
and rehabilitation ?

Which is it ?


In order for your policy to get some traction, it's important for you to lay out a
few planks of your policy ahead of time, so the audience can better understand
your thinking.

So here's a few simple questions (which should be quite easy for you to answer):


A. Road User Types Causing Accidents / Being Affected by an Increased ACC Levy

1. Does your policy apply to motorcyclists only ? If so, why ?

2. To other motorists as well (e.g. car drivers, truck drivers) ?

3. What about periodic road users (e.g. farmers on quad bikes using the road to
shift stock between paddocks ) ?

4. What about non-motorised road users (e.g. bicyclists ) ?

5. Any other specific inclusions or exclusions ?


B. Equity of Levying Proposed Charges

1. Is being charged a fine for a specific driving offence - and then also being
penalised further via an increased ACC levy amount - not inequitable ?

Is the offender not being punished twice ?

2. Would it be a "one-off" charge, or would it be a "recurring type" charge ?

3. If a recurring charge, would it be applied once every year (either at the time
of vehicle re-registration or at some other anniversary ) ? How many years would
it continue to be levied for ?

4. What if I was a licensed driver (and responsible for an accident), but I was
not the registered owner of the vehicle involved in the accident ? How would
the charge then be applied ?


C. Qualifying for an Increased ACC Levy ?

1. When you say an "at-fault history", what do you mean ?

Does that mean that I would have to have been successfully prosecuted (by the
Police) as the party responsible for having caused an accident ?

2. What if fault could not be clearly assigned to either driver involved in an
accident ? Or if both drivers were each deemed partly responsible ?

3. How significant would an injury (or vehicle damage) need to be before the
additional ACC levy should then come into effect ?

4. What if I simply ran off the road (e.g. due to not paying attention or to
slippery road conditions), did not cause any significant personal injury or
vehicle damage, but was still reported and was prosecuted by Police (say a
careless driving charge) ? Would I still be liable ?

5. What if I caused some vehicle damage, but no personal injury ? Would I still
be liable ?


D. Applying the Increased ACC Levy ?

1. Would the end-to-end business process need:

- Some increased interaction and exchange of data between Police and MOJ Courts,
Licensing and ACC organisations ?
- Some upgrade of their business processes, IT systems and interfaces ?

2. Would the charging of this additional ACC levy amount apply from the time
of the accident onwards ? Or from the time of successful prosecution ?

3. Would the additional ACC levy be associated with the vehicle involved, or
with the person (assume the registered owner of that vehicle) ?

4. If the additional ACC levy was to be applied against the vehicle, what if:
- the vehicle was not currently registered ?
- it had been sold ( de-registered ) ?

5. What if I had multiple vehicles ? Would the increased ACC levy amount now
be charged against each and every vehicle associated with me ?

6. What if I had multiple "at fault" accidents over a number of years? Would
the same ACC levy rate still continue to be applied, or would it continue to
increase (be stepped up in response to each accident) ?


E. Increased ACC Levy Rate or Amount ?

1. How were you planning to increase the ACC levy amount ?
- By a fixed $ amount ?
- By a rate percentage ?

2. How much extra were you looking at charging ? x $ or x % ?

3. What if my motorcycle is registered for (i) 3 or 6 months (ii) 12 months ?
Are variable rates or amounts required ?

3. How much annual "income" do you see the Government generating as a result of
first prosecuting these "at fault" riders or drivers, and then penalising them further
via the ACC system ?

4. If some "at fault" riders (or drivers) refuse to pay fines at present - and now refuse
to pay this additional ACC levy, which Government agency did you see being responsible
for notifying, chasing and collecting unpaid debt ?

================================================== ============================

Personally, I cannot see any good reason why Government would ever consider such
a proposition. Let alone consider the use of ACC as a means to penalise "offenders".

Why not ?

Well, just to state a few reasons off the top of my head :

1. I can't see any compelling argument why an increase in ACC levy rates would
drive a positive change in rider (or driver) behaviour.

If speed camera fines don't drive such behaviour now, why do you think changes
to ACC levies would be any more effective ?

2. It risks confusing current separation between driver infringement and penalty
(Police and MOJ Courts), licensing (Vehicle Licensing) and driver / passenger
injury treatment and rehabilitation (ACC) systems.

3. The fundamental fact that ACC is a risk oriented system (levies are calculated
based on an assessment of risk of accident and injury).

ACC is NOT a "fault oriented" system.

It would be the wrong system (tool) for the job of penalising offenders.

4. Cost of changes to various Government Dept business processes and IT systems
and interfaces.

5. Degree of interaction and data transfer required between various Government
Dept IT systems to make it work.

6. Government would be unlikely to recover the implementation and operational costs
associated with any such changes.


But maybe your answers will persuade me otherwise. I look forward to your comprehensive
reply .

[caspernz]

Raising ACC levies for those who've been proven to be at fault? Yeah nah, too much like ambulance at the bottom of the cliff for my liking.

I'd much sooner support having to renew drivers licence every 5 years.

But then along with that, meaningful enforcement on those who drive without a licence.

[Akzle]

.

I'd much sooner support having to renew drivers licence every 5 years.
.

which achieves what? and who pays for that?

[Voltaire]

So what you are saying then is that everyone should be considered as potentially at fault? Some road users are actually brighter than others did you know? Only punish the dumb "at fault" ones is my thinking.

I'm for pricing idiots off the road, when I lived in Ireland about 16 years ago you did not see large capacity cars as Rego was based on engine capacity and compulsory insurance meant less experienced drivers premiums were higher.
I can't say I liked paying more but you didn't have the " She will be right" attitude you have here.
But then I'd like to see hospitals charging people who turn up suffering from to much of a good time as well.

[Moi]

So what you are saying then is that everyone should be considered as potentially at fault? Some road users are actually brighter than others did you know? Only punish the dumb "at fault" ones is my thinking.

I stand to be corrected on this, at one time insurance companies did consider all parties involved in a crash "as potentially at fault" and proportioned blame accordingly. If you were, for agrument's sake, rear-ended then they considered you to be "at fault" for being there.

As for "punish the dumb 'at fault' ones", as has been said, "ambulance at bottom of hill" thinking. I hope and pray you have absolutely nothing to do with education...

[Moi]

Wow what a ramble!! Sure what I propose lacks technical detail but a simple vehicle insurance model could be applied to ACC by imposing a higher charge for those with an at fault history. For example when you apply for vehicle insurance you are asked to declare any past "at fault crashes" going back a number of years and your premium is set at a higher rate because of it.

Tell you what...

if you think your idea is worthy of consideration, start a petition and when you have enough signatures present it to the Minister for ACC, Hon Iain Lees-Galloway, and present your case for changing the present system.


By the way, don't be surprised if when you start discussing your ideas that others suggest that you "may not be of sound mind"...

[caspernz]

which achieves what? and who pays for that?

Ok, read it as having to resit driving test every 2 to 5 years. If you take an approved defensive driving course maybe you can have a longer licence term? It raises the standard over time. Has to be self funding by savings in road trauma overall, be cheaper for taxpayer me thinks. Plenty of jobs in there as well.


So what you are saying then is that everyone should be considered as potentially at fault? Some road users are actually brighter than others did you know? Only punish the dumb "at fault" ones is my thinking.

The approach of ACC is in the name, it's compensation not insurance.

If you only punish those who've already stuffed up, doesn't that equate to ambulance at bottom of cliff mentality? It doesn't improve driver standards or road safety.

There has to be a multi pronged approach to improving road safety. It includes better trained users of roads, which I've done voluntarily. Then better enforcement of existing rules, which I have no problem with. Then on top of that I'll happily go along with having to requalify for my drivers licence on a periodic basis. Heck, plenty of us get assessed in our workplace on periodic basis for competency, why not extend that to road users?

Your way of thinking, hike ACC levy for offenders, can we change that to shortening the life span of offending drivers' licence, ie having to resit every year maybe? Or some form of traffic school instead of fines for offenders.

But perhaps the main problem is that holding a drivers licence is seen as a right, whereas it should be seen as a privilege.

[Moi]

The govt is only interested in seeking public opinion on policy changes when they propose to change policy though.

Prove that not to be the case with your petition to change ACC...


... Guys on this site are actually the only ones who feel that the current motorcycle ACC charges are fair...

True, some on here do say they see the current ACC levies are unfair. Perhaps they'll be the first to sign your petition to change it to an accident insurance scheme where you pay premiums dependent on the amount of cover you wish in case you have an accident.


... On other sites there is desire for charges to be lowered and if they were to lower charges for motorcyclists what better way to fund those charges but to put up ACC for those with an at fault accident history.

What other sites?

Perhaps a few more folks who'll sign your petition...

If you think it is such a great idea to change ACC from an "at risk" levied scheme to an insured "at fault" premium scheme, then you need to write a discussion paper, as viking did, outlining your reasoning for the changes to the present scheme. May I suggest you look at the USA model as a guide...

[Moi]

I have never advocated a change to the scheme just a change to how levies/premiums are applied. Its not rocket science but maybe to some on here it is,

What? Never advocated for a change? What is your constant repetition of "charging those at fault more" then?

That would necessitate a change to the scheme because the legislation is written to charge levies according to the "risk" involved with particular activities. That has been explained by others in the last few days.

So, you are advocating a change to the scheme and if you can't see that, then, to quote you, it's not rocket science but maybe I'd suggest definitely to some on here it is

[Viking01]

Wow what a ramble!! Sure what I propose lacks technical detail but a simple vehicle insurance model could be applied to ACC by imposing a higher charge for those with an at fault history. For example when you apply for vehicle insurance you are asked to declare any past "at fault crashes" going back a number of years and your premium is set at a higher rate because of it.


"Wow. What a ramble !! "

I do apologise. I should have remembered your attention deficit issue and your problem
with reading more than a few sentences at any one time, let alone comprehending them.

But ramble or not, it does however present only a very small subset of the various points
your "proposal" would have to answer in order to be considered.


But more importantly, your reply didn't even answer the fundamental question I asked you
up-front:
What exactly were you trying to achieve ?

Go back and read it again. Perhaps if you could just start with a clear answer to that
simple question.


"Sure what I propose lacks technical detail ..."

Look, please don't sell yourself short. What you've put up to date lacks ANY detail.
Business, functional, process, technical, the whole shooting match.

Normally, it's about this stage when I'd ask the person that had put forward such a
proposal to go forth and multiply, and to come back when they have some information
(and a clue what they were talking about). In the nicest of manner, you understand.

So how about you go do the same. [ Well, at least the first part ]


"But a simple vehicle insurance model could be applied to ACC ..."

"Simple insurance model" ? Have you ever worked for an insurance company and with
some of their systems ? Have you even read your own car insurance policy recently ?

There is no such thing as "a simple insurance model", vehicular or otherwise. Your
cluelessness is really showing.


ACC has never been an insurance based system, and never will be. Never architected
or developed for that purpose. As others have already kindly advised you within earlier
threads.

And while some may have performed studies for (and written papers advising) Ministers
on the viability of involving the insurance industry (or at least giving them access to
those ever-so-tempting pools of money), it's never happened. Not even in the last ten
years.


So, please, don't keep coming back making the same stupid statement (about insurance
schemes and systems) in class every day. It was wrong the first time that you uttered it,
and it will continue to be wrong. Please do try to learn from your mistakes.

And when one of the other students in class (FJRider) kindly tries to help you and school
you on the difference between a premium and a levy, please do try and pay more attention.
Maybe even thank him.


Now, if I could have an answer back on my first simple question (What exactly were you
trying to achieve ?) before end of day, that would be a helpful start.

[Akzle]

Wow what a ramble!! Sure what I propose lacks technical detail but a simple vehicle insurance model could be applied to ACC by imposing a higher charge for those with an at fault history. For example when you apply for vehicle insurance you are asked to declare any past "at fault crashes" going back a number of years and your premium is set at a higher rate because of it.

which didn't answer any of his questions, and is just you repeating what you've already said a hundred times before. you fuckwit.

[Akzle]

. I hope and pray you have absolutely nothing to do with education...

quite obviosuly not.

[Akzle]

Ok, read it as having to resit driving test every 2 to 5 years. If you take an approved defensive driving course maybe you can have a longer licence term? It raises the standard over time. Has to be self funding by savings in road trauma overall, be cheaper for taxpayer me thinks. Plenty of jobs in there as well.
.

oh i see. you think a driving license is indicative of some kind of ability.

dont get to see the road much huh?

[Akzle]

Someone on here posted yesterday that compulsary schooling will not work as it will create over confidence or people will just go back to their old ways after they get out of school anyway. Financial penalties do work as a deterrant as when you pay rates or power bill (as examples) there is a financial penalty applied if you do not pay on time.

i'm pretty sure the same post you refer, fairly explicitly, stated "financial penalties have no effect"


yes, see, look, right there in THE FIRST FUCKING SENTENCE. you retarded cunt.



Oh piss off - that is stupid. The reason why I don't want a higher premium is that it simply does not work ..

We get fined for speeding - a fault-payment linked system. That never stopped me speeding ... It just makes me more aware of the popo - and tempts my to buy a radar detector (as many have). The fine system has not stopped people speeding .. a higher premium ACC for riders at fault will have bugger all impact.

Compulsory riding schools are highly unlikely to work either ... and could even have the effect of making people over-confident.

If you force people to go to school they will not learn - they will simply do the time ... with no impact at all.

What needs to change is rider attitude - and fines or compulsory training will have no impact - peer pressure is what has changed our attitudes about drink-driving ...

But that is not likely to work in this case either - My attitude is total resistance - good luck with any efforts to change that.

You can fuck off ..


you're a fuckwit.

[Akzle]

I have never advocated a change to the scheme just a change to how levies/premiums are applied. Its not rocket science but maybe to some on here it is,

you're a fuckwit

[Akzle]

So you cant work out what I am trying to achieve? Well that proves you are not very bright then despite the length of your ramblings creating an illusion that you are but only to you maybe. What would be achieved by ACC premiums becoming fault based is simply those who do not have an at fault history are "REWARDED" WITH LOWER PREMIUMS AND THOSE WITH AN AT FAULT HISTORY PAY "HIGHER PREMIUMS". If you dont understand that I am sorry I can not explain it any simpler.

you're a fuckwit

[Akzle]

I will agree with you but only as far as the rich go. For anyone else financial penalties will hurt. Fuckwit


i would challenge you to provide even one example of where anyone (not a fuckwit) has ever not-done anything because of legislation, or infringement fees.
...WOULD. but:

you're a fuckwit.

[Moi]

... But more importantly, your reply didn't even answer the fundamental question I asked you up-front:
What exactly were you trying to achieve ?

Go back and read it again. Perhaps if you could just start with a clear answer to that
simple question.

I think you are expecting a great deal... I'm doubtful if any straightforward questions have ever been answered.



... Normally, it's about this stage when I'd ask the person that had put forward such a proposal to go forth and multiply,

NO!

Oh, wait... you mean in the old Anglo-Saxon way... :facepalm:

[Banditbandit]

You are being semantical as to whether its called a premium or a levy the cost remains the same but if you feel by calling it a levy makes you feel better all the best.


Wow what a ramble!! Sure what I propose lacks technical detail but a simple vehicle insurance model could be applied to ACC by imposing a higher charge for those with an at fault history. For example when you apply for vehicle insurance you are asked to declare any past "at fault crashes" going back a number of years and your premium is set at a higher rate because of it.


Someone on here posted yesterday that compulsary schooling will not work as it will create over confidence or people will just go back to their old ways after they get out of school anyway. Financial penalties do work as a deterrant as when you pay rates or power bill (as examples) there is a financial penalty applied if you do not pay on time.


Can I recommend a good basic English school for you?

I think I will just go with Akzle's approach

You're a fuckwit ..

[Banditbandit]

What you are saying then is that if all fines for everything were dumped there would be no behavioural change made by anyone? Your a fuckwit if you think that.

I can't help responding to this one

If all the penalties were removed there would be behaviour change - someone you have driven crazy would kill you ..

[actungbaby]

Anybody else here the radio this morning where some guy said "motorcyclists over 40 should have to re-sit their test once a year." This following the 13th serious bike accident in 2018.

I think it was the breeze playing in the physio this morning (Yep over 40 and dropped my bike front end slide Nov last year first time in 25 years...body does not bounce back like it once did...been riding the whole time too :( )

Yeah well its a Shock when u realise shit this thing doesint stand upright by itself . i did that going to work in 80,s lucky was just pick up

Ride to work do my days work ride home . know be like limp for a week compain for 3 days .

That idea daft . u cant test a persons abilty to avoid a car driver so whats the point ditto loosing the front end just bad luck .

MM is a pro and even he does it .

[Viking01]

So you cant work out what I am trying to achieve? Well that proves you are not very bright then despite the length of your ramblings creating an illusion that you are but only to you maybe. What would be achieved by ACC premiums becoming fault based is simply those who do not have an at fault history are "REWARDED" WITH LOWER PREMIUMS AND THOSE WITH AN AT FAULT HISTORY PAY "HIGHER PREMIUMS". If you dont understand that I am sorry I can not explain it any simpler.


"So you can't work out what I am trying to achieve?"

I doubt that I'm the only one in that space. Now, and in the future.


Before continuing the discussion further, when will you ever understand that:

- The ACC system was purposely never architected as an insurance-based system,
but as a means of funding accident treatment and rehabilitation. Hence its 'no fault'
basis, its risk based model, levy calculation (funding the various ACC scheme pools)
and contributions being non-optional.

- That one main benefit of ACC not being fault-based is that it allows ACC to focus
on funding of injury treatment and rehabilitation activity [as per its charter]. And to
be able to make approved payments in a timely manner.

In the process, avoiding lumbering ACC with legal costs associated with determination
of fault, having to sue parties to secure payment, collection of associated debt etc.

Helping to avoid crowding up our court systems even further. And probably incurring
a lower overall cost to the taxpayer along the way.



From your last reply, you want "not-at-fault" riders or drivers to be able to be financially
rewarded, and "at fault" riders or drivers to be able to be penalised further ?

So why don't you just go down the "vehicle insurance" route e.g.

- Implement mandatory third party insurance (law change)
- Allow insurance rewards for no "at fault" claims (via lower insurance premiums)
- Allow insurance penalty for one or more "at fault" claims (via higher insurance premiums)
and let people use the Courts as an enforcement mechanism for non-payment by offenders
as and when needed ?

And if there was such a compelling business case, surely the Insurance industry would have
already investigated and be quite supportive of an Insurance industry approach ?

Why should ACC even be involved ? You even said in a following post that you didn't want
to change the ACC system.


Lastly, why do you feel the ACC scheme pools - targeted for funding of injury treatment
and rehabilitation - should now be able to be tapped to also pay out "rewards" (for good
driving behaviour or fewer "at fault" accidents) ?

Assuming existing levies are focused solely on funding injury treatment and rehabilitation,
where would the additional funding needed to support "rewards" payment come from ?

I'm sure all will become more evident when you provide us with more details on your proposal.

[Akzle]

What you are saying then is that if all fines for everything were dumped there would be no behavioural change made by anyone? Your a fuckwit if you think that.

did i say that? please quote it for reference. the exact point at which i said that.

you, being a fuckwit, do not get to determine whether anyone else is.

you're a fuckwit.

[Akzle]

You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those not at fault is funded now do you? You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will. Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question many times.

yet you go to the effort of posting a lot of non-answers.

you're a fuckwit.

[Woodman]

Someone on here posted yesterday that compulsary schooling will not work as it will create over confidence or people will just go back to their old ways after they get out of school anyway. Financial penalties do work as a deterrant as when you pay rates or power bill (as examples) there is a financial penalty applied if you do not pay on time.

That isn't stopping people using more electricity though is it?

[Viking01]

You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those not at fault is funded now do you? You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will. Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question many times.


"You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those
not at fault is funded now do you? "


I will admit to some working knowledge of ACC and some of its internal business systems
and operation.

Enough to know ACC deals in levies, and not premiums. Which you continue to confuse.
And think it's just semantics.

Enough to know that ACC groups vehicles into classes deemed to have similar levels
of risk, with levy rates being calculated and assigned per class (whether a car, truck
or motorcycle).

Enough to know ACC levy rates may be varied, after consideration of underlying fund
balances, provisions, draw-downs, scheme cross subsidy etc.


But I do have to admit that your ACC "premium reward scheme" does have me beaten.

Especially as your leading comment above seems to imply it already exists, and that
you're familiar with its funding (or payout).

The ACC search engine - and Google - couldn't seem to find any mention of your
"premium reward scheme". Perhaps you could just point me to a link re this ACC
"product" on the ACC website ?

Shouldn't take you more than a minute to find. Even for a busy person like you.


"You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will."

Don't be in doubt - I have no intention of doing so. I'm always happy to learn
something new, but prefer fact to fantasy.

"Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question
many times. "

Replied - maybe . Actually provided a meaningful answer - No.

[granstar]

Wow what a ramble!! Sure what I propose lacks technical detail but a simple vehicle insurance model could be applied to ACC by imposing a higher charge for those with an at fault history. For example when you apply for vehicle insurance you are asked to declare any past "at fault crashes" going back a number of years and your premium is set at a higher rate because of it.

Annnd your going to tell them :killingme

[granstar]

What you are saying then is that if all fines for everything were dumped there would be no behavioural change made by anyone? Your a fuckwit if you think that.

There is no need to be rude to people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=460&v=sEk6Kha1lB8

[george formby]

The last few pages are some of the best I have read on KB for yonks. :clap: All prompted by someone with a very small cauliflower between their ears.

I take back what I said about KB going down the shitter. Vive la resistance!

[FJRider]

What you are saying then is that if all fines for everything were dumped there would be no behavioural change made by anyone? Your a fuckwit if you think that.

He is correct. Those that get fines fall into two groups ... those that pay them (some immediately ... and pay even if they can [or can't] afford it) ... and those that don't (and never will ... even if they can afford it).

Thus ... the behavior of both will never change.

[Daffyd]

You and a few others just attack my ideas because you are jelous you cant think up anything better yourself. Maybe you would have some credibility if as well as attacking my idea you responded with an idea of your own. Or are you just fearfull your idea would be attacked by others as well?

I like me. Who do you like?

[Akzle]

"You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those
not at fault is funded now do you? "


I will admit to some working knowledge of ACC and some of its internal business systems
and operation.

Enough to know ACC deals in levies, and not premiums. Which you continue to confuse.
And think it's just semantics.

Enough to know that ACC groups vehicles into classes deemed to have similar levels
of risk, with levy rates being calculated and assigned per class (whether a car, truck
or motorcycle).

Enough to know ACC levy rates may be varied, after consideration of underlying fund
balances, provisions, draw-downs, scheme cross subsidy etc.


But I do have to admit that your ACC "premium reward scheme" does have me beaten.

Especially as your leading comment above seems to imply it already exists, and that
you're familiar with its funding (or payout).

The ACC search engine - and Google - couldn't seem to find any mention of your
"premium reward scheme". Perhaps you could just point me to a link re this ACC
"product" on the ACC website ?

Shouldn't take you more than a minute to find. Even for a busy person like you.


"You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will."

Don't be in doubt - I have no intention of doing so. I'm always happy to learn
something new, but prefer fact to fantasy.

"Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question
many times. "

Replied - maybe . Actually provided a meaningful answer - No.


brevity not your strong point eh. and i think you'll find it's "sematicals"
:weird:

[Viking01]

brevity not your strong point eh. and i think you'll find it's "sematicals"
:weird:

Occasionally.

"Sematicals" - Not in my dictionary.

[Akzle]

.

"Sematicals" - Not in my dictionary.

oh. well i guess your not a fuckwit.

[pritch]

Somebody mentioned autonomous cars, can't remember where and I'm buggered if I'm reading back through 47 pages of this.

Anyhoo, hot from the USA: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2018/01/23/a-tesla-owners-excuse-for-his-dui-crash-the-car-was-driving/?utm_term=.8ee05b9c0488

[caspernz]

oh i see. you think a driving license is indicative of some kind of ability.

dont get to see the road much huh?

Yes, in my country of origin a driving licence was indeed indicative of actual ability to drive to a certain standard. In NZ it seems a licence comes in a Weetbix packet :killingme

Oh yeah I must admit I don't see the road much, down to maybe 120,000 km a year now, used to be more like 175,000 km a year...:rolleyes:




I can't help responding to this one

If all the penalties were removed there would be behaviour change - someone you have driven crazy would kill you ..

Can we turn up unannounced or is there a booking system? :bleh:



The last few pages are some of the best I have read on KB for yonks. :clap: All prompted by someone with a very small cauliflower between their ears.

I take back what I said about KB going down the shitter. Vive la resistance!

Please stop insulting cauliflower...you meant to say cabbage surely? :cool:

[Scuba_Steve]

. In NZ it seems a licence comes in a Weetbix packet :killingme


That's not quite true, in NZ our licence is based primarily on an age limit & having a spare hundy

[Moi]

... If all the penalties were removed there would be behaviour change - someone you have driven crazy would kill you ..


... Can we turn up unannounced or is there a booking system? :bleh:

We could make a whole television series about it - competitors need to devise their method and then present to judges and audience who decide which is the best and that would then be done for the final episode...


We could call it "Roman Arena" and even have dogs involved somehow...

[Scubbo]

another death :(

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/100869949/truck-and-motorbike-in-serious-hastings-crash

I wonder if this will be counted as a road motorcycle accident in the stats as it was probably a dirt bike / unregistered on the dirt track beside the road?

"
A police spokesman at the scene said it appeared the truck had pulled out of a driveway and hit the motorcyclist.
"It appears at this stage that [the biker was] on the wrong side of the road and a truck's pulled out, a collision has occurred."
He said the motorcyclist, who died at the scene, was in the dirt cycle lane on the side of the road.

"

[Coldrider]

Cycleways are part of the roading system, and all laws apply, except cycles and pedestrians can travel both ways.

[neels]

Semantical is not an English word. Semantic is. Buy a dictionary.
Thank you, my inner grammar nazi was quietly seething at that one.

[Banditbandit]

another death :(

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/100869949/truck-and-motorbike-in-serious-hastings-crash

I wonder if this will be counted as a road motorcycle accident in the stats as it was probably a dirt bike / unregistered on the dirt track beside the road?

"
A police spokesman at the scene said it appeared the truck had pulled out of a driveway and hit the motorcyclist.
"It appears at this stage that [the biker was] on the wrong side of the road and a truck's pulled out, a collision has occurred."
He said the motorcyclist, who died at the scene, was in the dirt cycle lane on the side of the road.

"


Unfortunately, it probably will be - as it was a motorcycle and the idiot was on the road

It will also involve an ACC pay out for the death ..

[Swoop]

I'm for pricing idiots off the road, when I lived in Ireland about 16 years ago you did not see large capacity cars as Rego was based on engine capacity...
Well there's a fucked up scheme. Someone in a V8 Fowlcoon being ripped up by a ricer with a turbo-ed 1800 in it.
No wonder The tax-avoiding Apple Corporation are based there...



... compulsary schooling will not work as it will create over confidence...
The utter majority (90%?) will leave and be far more aware of RISK factors, rather than going out in an attempt to be more aggressive/faster/dumber*.


* To be dumber, simply read and assimilate Miss Cassina's posts.
btw, you are still a completely retarded cunt.

[FJRider]

Thank you, my inner grammar nazi was quietly seething at that one.

My grammar's dead now. She was a nice lady ... :innocent:

[FJRider]

Unfortunately, it probably will be - as it was a motorcycle and the idiot was on the road

It will also involve an ACC pay out for the death ..

Regardless of the legality of the motorcycle ... it will be. Any public place (on or near a road) where public have access ... all vehicles are required must have reg. and W.O.F.

And you need a permit to ride a motorcycle on a footpath (ie: Posties need one) and cycle lanes are a no go for all motorized vehicles.

[R650R]

Some people are unsafe at any speed ;)

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/hawkes-bay/101075568/Police-officer-suffers-minor-injury-after-colleague-reverses-into-him

[Akzle]

Some people are unsafe at any speed ;)

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/hawkes-bay/101075568/Police-officer-suffers-minor-injury-after-colleague-reverses-into-him

"... and the offending driver will be charged with careless use causing injury and be required to undergo anti-fuckwit training and a driving course"

[Scubbo]

anther savage crash :( --- take it easy guys!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/hawkes-bay/101165060/fatal-crash-involving-two-motorbikes-and-a-truck-at-hawkes-bay

[pritch]

Another group ride crash too.

And what was it, may I ask, that suggested "group ride" to you?

[EJK]

Another group ride crash too.

Your point?

[caspernz]

Another group ride crash too.


And what was it, may I ask, that suggested "group ride" to you?


Your point?

The article only mentions two bikes...I guess two is company and three is a crowd?

Look I just don't know how I'm still alive. In past couple of weeks I've done around 2000 km, some of it as a group of 7. Some as group of 3, part of that in heavy rain. Even today I was out in group of 3. Am I looking down from heaven? Oh hang on, I don't believe in that :wacko:

Tragic as the accident in the Hawkes Bay today is, I doubt the ink is dry on the incomplete SCU report, so having it described as a group ride...:mad::bash:

[caseye]

Another group ride crash too.

You truely are a FUCKWIT, piss off back to your hole, curl up and do us all a favour by shutting the fuck up.
No one goes out on a ride with the expectation that they are not coming home, group ride or not, that is a fact.
We all need time in the saddle to improve our staying alive skills, because these days, out there on the road, apart from riding our bikes that is really what we are doing,improving our chances of getting home every single time we straddle a bike.
Katman used to have a one line message, it IS as relavent today as it was then. Personal Responsibility take possession of it and make sure you don't end up a statistic.
You have no relevance, except to revel in macabre statements of missinformation and offering advice that could conceivably kill new riders and then hiding behind your precious group rides are dangerous monolouge.
We All Know that.
The difference is we practice and do things, like go to riding courses to improve our chances, we ride with others who are older and have more experience and we accept critique from those people.
Most of us have never come off our bikes and probably won't.
I'm over listening to a self confessed at least 7 times accident involved person who still can't comprehend that any sort of interaction with other willing bike riders, be they mates,instructors or just someone on a group ride who offers advice are good people trying to improve theirs and the lot of other road users by getting themsleves up to scratch.
So I say again, You are a FUCKWIT and I want you gone from KB once and for all.
Anyone else care to comment?

[caspernz]

Yes caseye, I know it's a waste of time interacting with cassina...but the BS needs to be stemmed aye?

I do like this place, but yeah the constant derailing of threads by cassina...:facepalm:

[Woodman]

You truely are a FUCKWIT, piss off back to your hole, curl up and do us all a favour by shutting the fuck up.
No one goes out on a ride with the expectation that they are not coming home, group ride or not, that is a fact.
We all need time in the saddle to improve our staying alive skills, because these days, out there on the road, apart from riding our bikes that is really what we are doing,improving our chances of getting home every single time we straddle a bike.
Katman used to have a one line message, it IS as relavent today as it was then. Personal Responsibility take possession of it and make sure you don't end up a statistic.
You have no relevance, except to revel in macabre statements of missinformation and offering advice that could conceivably kill new riders and then hiding behind your precious group rides are dangerous monolouge.
We All Know that.
The difference is we practice and do things, like go to riding courses to improve our chances, we ride with others who are older and have more experience and we accept critique from those people.
Most of us have never come off our bikes and probably won't.
I'm over listening to a self confessed at least 7 times accident involved person who still can't comprehend that any sort of interaction with other willing bike riders, be they mates,instructors or just someone on a group ride who offers advice are good people trying to improve theirs and the lot of other road users by getting themsleves up to scratch.
So I say again, You are a FUCKWIT and I want you gone from KB once and for all.
Anyone else care to comment?

Agree. Maybe we should all just stop coming on kiwibiker until a mod wakes up and realises that cassina is the only one on here.

I will start the ball rolling. Fuck you kiwibiker I am outta here if you don't get rid of the fuckwit.

Just watch, nothing will happen.

[Coldrider]

Saw the black mufti commy going thru havelock north village in a hissifit, no group ride that I know of, unless classic club kick start ride or something. By the way late this week traffic pigs attended a minor accident on the HB expressway. One porklet reversed his firms car over another snoutlet pig, resulting in an injury. At least no one innocent party was injured, just a pig running over a pig. But then they went to shift the blame on the public, if motorists were not exceeding 30ks during the roadworks, there would be no initial accident, and then they would not need to attend and injure themselves, better work stories.

[caspernz]

Agree. Maybe we should all just stop coming on kiwibiker until a mod wakes up and realises that cassina is the only one on here.

I will start the ball rolling. Fuck you kiwibiker I am outta here if you don't get rid of the fuckwit.

Just watch, nothing will happen.

This is a democracy so you're right, nothing will happen.

Although in a democracy, sometimes there are acts that fly below the radar...that keep a democracy a democracy.

Shame we don't have an acronym agency to enlist for such a mission on KB :cool:

[AllanB]

Another group ride crash too.

You are a Fuckwit.

[Akzle]

sorry i'm late.





Another group ride crash too.

you're a fuckwit

[Paul in NZ]

2 motorcycles collided with the truck. Irrespective of who was at fault I bet only one motorcycle would have gone down if they had not been travelling close together.

I refrain from pileing in on you generally but that is such a moronic thing to say (unless you were there) that I'm speachlesss

[old slider]

Saw a lot of group riders today, these groups varied in size from 2-3 riders to some groups of 6-8 or more.

In my opinion these groups of riders were much more visible to other motorists, thus making them safer or more visible than say a solo rider.

My group today consisted of only 3 bikes travelling South for an hour or so and then return after a feed and a coffee, mostly this riding was on busy highways.

Now at no time did I feel pressured to keep up, we kept plenty of stopping distance between us and we rode in a staggered formation, except for when passing slower vehicles or when on the twisty bits.

Each and everyone of us have choices in life, choices on how we ride, choices on what protective gear we use, choices on who we ride with etc.

My choice is to enjoy my rides and to keep working/improving on my "survival skills" the information gleamed from these posts is as always, useful and gentle reminders to keep our eyes and ears open.

[Woodman]

Why is it moronic to think that if 2 bikes and it could have been cars that hit the truck if they had not been travelling so close together both would not have collided. How do you think multi car pile ups happen?

Traffic butthead.

[Coldrider]

Why is it moronic to think that if 2 bikes and it could have been cars that hit the truck if they had not been travelling so close together both would not have collided. How do you think multi car pile ups happen?
Middle road begins 3ks from home. I did the rideforrver gold bar on that road, i know it well. Many motorcyclists have died or wrecked their bikes there over the years. I have had my biggest scare there. It is a dominated by large and small farms, tractors, trucks, flatdecks, farmdogs and stock. You werent there, neither was I.

[Coldrider]

To blame the road is not riding to the conditions is it?
I am not speaking for other riders, but I know the road well. But tell me, what were the conditions there today?

[Coldrider]

The actual outcome of the incident could be unexpected to many, based on what I know of that area. I am not going to speculate.

[Laava]

2 motorcycles collided with the truck. Irrespective of who was at fault I bet only one motorcycle would have gone down if they had not been travelling close together.

What an incredibly dumb thing to say.
It is true what they say about you...if you had ANY brains you would stop posting on KB altogether.

[granstar]

What an incredibly dumb thing to say.
It is true what they say about you...if you had ANY brains you would stop posting on KB altogether.

Refrain from taking troll bait :laugh:

[Akzle]

2 motorcycles collided with the truck. Irrespective of who was at fault I bet only one motorcycle would have gone down if they had not been travelling close together.

you're a fuckwit

[R650R]

anther savage crash :( --- take it easy guys!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/hawkes-bay/101165060/fatal-crash-involving-two-motorbikes-and-a-truck-at-hawkes-bay

What happened to not posting accidents on this site, fatal at that too... less than four hours after its happened...

[awayatc]

2 motorcycles collided with the truck. Irrespective of who was at fault I bet only one motorcycle would have gone down if they had not been travelling close together.

Disrespectful bag of bile.....

Fuckwit status for you is an utopian wishful state of mind .....
Forever out of reach.

You are a dispicable bit of flotsam

[pritch]

According to you the road is bad. How would I know as I dont know the road but you do.

I didn't see the bit where he said the road was bad. Only you said that.


You truly are a fuckwit yourself if you cant work out that if the bikes were not travelling in close proximity they BOTH
would not have gone down.

Again I see no reference in Awayatc's post to proximity.

You really are living in some weird alternate space. What colour is the sky where you are?

[Jeeper]

Agree. Maybe we should all just stop coming on kiwibiker until a mod wakes up and realises that cassina is the only one on here.

I will start the ball rolling. Fuck you kiwibiker I am outta here if you don't get rid of the fuckwit.

Just watch, nothing will happen.X2. Seems to be that way.

[98tls]

2 motorcycles collided with the truck. Irrespective of who was at fault I bet only one motorcycle would have gone down if they had not been travelling close together.

Dont log in here to much these days,used to read your posts then and shake my head to be fair i felt embarrassed for you seems you have learnt nothing but then thats the internet and motorcycling i guess.

[EJK]

What I have learnt on here is that there are a pack of wankers that love rubbishing moy posts but they cant think up anything brighter themselves. What have you learnt??

Oh that's very ironic, don't you think?

[AllanB]

What I have learnt on here is that there are a pack of wankers that love rubbishing moy posts but they cant think up anything brighter themselves. What have you learnt??

I find a good ride on the motorcycle clears away the shit from the working week. I'm seeing the need for you to gear up and release some of that stress.

[Akzle]

What I have learnt on here is that there are a pack of wankers that love rubbishing moy posts but they cant think up anything brighter themselves. What have you learnt??

you're a fuckwit

[98tls]

What I have learnt on here is that there are a pack of wankers that love rubbishing moy posts but they cant think up anything brighter themselves. What have you learnt??

Take a breath and put your hands behind your back ie walk away from the keyboard.If this was a pub and you were amongst a group of motorcyclists you wouldnt bang on like you do so why do it here? That or your simply to stupid to be an idiot either way no skin off my nose.

[caspernz]

What I have learnt on here is that there are a pack of wankers that love rubbishing moy posts but they cant think up anything brighter themselves. What have you learnt??

On the contrary. Plenty of us have learned from our past mistakes. Then we took advantage of training made available. Some have gone even further and volunteer to help others improve their skills. You just keep re-running the same crap.

Probably explains why you get lots of negative feedback. :brick:

As you were :wacko:

[eldog]

What I have learnt on here is that there are a pack of wankers that love rubbishing moy posts but they cant think up anything brighter themselves. What have you learnt??
heres a short summary of what I have learnt.
You don’t do group rides
you don’t know the full facts on a lot of things you post
you don’t listen or try to rebute
you don’t slow down at school crossing you speed up
you don’t quote your sources
you don’t ride much
you don’t know about pheripheral vision or at least describe it properly
you are half baked
you wear tramping boots
you won’t try anything anyone suggests because you are scared it will prove you wrong
you try and derail threads with the same drivel
you have nothing to offer
you won’t consider our suggestions to improve our lack of skills, or others ability to stay alive on the road
you don’t ride far
you try and screw people over
you don’t have a lot of language skills (or spell see’may’ above)
you don’t have any friends on here, except maybe .....

putting you on ignore is bliss.....

I suggest removal of any of your posts not revelant in any thread.

Thankfully (for you) you live in the Sth Island.

[granstar]

heres a short summary of what I have learnt.
putting you on ignore is bliss.....

I suggest removal of any of your posts not revelant in any thread.



Done "
To add a user to the ignore list, enter their name into the empty text box and click 'Okay'."

[Voltaire]

Everyone who says not to reply and claiming "on ignore" eagerly awaiting responses.:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Right....being pressured to keep up.....with re gibbing the spare room :eek:

[Swoop]

... that love rubbishing moy posts. What have you learnt??

That you are an attention seeking cunt. Sadly some people might read your dribble and believe it has relevance on the real roads, putting them in danger.

Catch cancer and fuck off, then die. Retard.

[Moi]

An element of truth in this article:

http://www.driven.co.nz/news/lifestyle/opinion-motorcyclists-it-s-time-to-take-some-responsibility/?ref=driven_fbpage

[Akzle]

you lot are STILL engaging it.


blahblahblah....

I suggest removal of any of your posts not revelant in any thread.
.

i tried reporting it's posts, since it was derailing every fucken thread with the same horseshit. but i think the mod has given up. i don't rly blame him.


call it a fuckwit. and nothing else.

[actungbaby]

Fucksake, go do a course yourself and find out for yourself (I have), reading something somewhere and then blabbing on about it as if you are an expert has no credit and it just leaves Akzle stuck on his record albeit true. Do a course and report back about how many are over confident, I suggest you won't find any but we need the facts and not just some Coronation Street gossip. TY.

I did one in the 80s cant say it affected me this way .mind you am never been over confident i suspect you are as a person . not the course
I love to be confident in everthing be great. well some things .
i whould though if you honest doing a course whould make u realize .your not perfect who is . i enjoyed the course . only really cost that stop me doing another . guy on my facebook runs riding courses Philip . not sure what its called seems really grounded guy to me . keen motorcyclist.

[Berries]

An element of truth in this article:

http://www.driven.co.nz/news/lifestyle/opinion-motorcyclists-it-s-time-to-take-some-responsibility/?ref=driven_fbpage
Yeah, I think'll go to church if I want to be preached by someone on their favourite 'pastime', especially when they have just failed their CBTA.

[Moi]

Yeah, I think'll go to church if I want to be preached by someone on their favourite 'pastime', especially when they have just failed their CBTA.

When I read that I did wonder, as the writer does their motorbike road tests. I'm wondering if he did the CBTA 6R out-of-curiosity and discovered his skills were not up to the standard required...

[Berries]

I had an issue with something he said in almost every paragraph but he is forgiven as it is a special day today.

[Akzle]

I had an issue with something he said in almost every paragraph but he is forgiven as it is a special day today.

blowjob day?

[Berries]

It's never been the same since we had Bouncer put down.

[AllanB]

blowjob day?

Only if a multicultural BJ. :niceone:

[FJRider]

The only way retards like you will become educated will be to be involved in a not at fault crash. Then you wont think you are so cool.

45 years of riding motorcycles. Every accident is an education. Knowing there were things you missed you could have seen ... but didn't.

Ignoring issues because you are in the right ... might just kill you. But it will be ok ... because it wasn't your fault.

Dead but not at fault ... is not cool either ...

[IkieBikie]

heres a short summary of what I have learnt.
You don’t do group rides
you don’t know the full facts on a lot of things you post
you don’t listen or try to rebute
you don’t slow down at school crossing you speed up
you don’t quote your sources
you don’t ride much
you don’t know about pheripheral vision or at least describe it properly
you are half baked
you wear tramping boots
you won’t try anything anyone suggests because you are scared it will prove you wrong
you try and derail threads with the same drivel
you have nothing to offer
you won’t consider our suggestions to improve our lack of skills, or others ability to stay alive on the road
you don’t ride far
you try and screw people over
you don’t have a lot of language skills (or spell see’may’ above)
you don’t have any friends on here, except maybe .....

putting you on ignore is bliss.....

I suggest removal of any of your posts not revelant in any thread.

Thankfully (for you) you live in the Sth Island.

I'm sure there's more but

You think its good to corner and put your foot down on the road
You think everyone on a group ride is racing to keep up
You don't seem to care everyone thinks you are a fuckwit

[eldog]

you lot are STILL engaging it.



i tried reporting it's posts, since it was derailing every fucken thread with the same horseshit. but i think the mod has given up. i don't rly blame him.


call it a fuckwit. and nothing else.

Was really answering Caseye’s question.
I had put it on ignore already, but, I noticed some posts referring to this.
What had we learnt? What had it learnt?

removal of all posts by it in non relevant threads.
add ‘Ignored Forum Netiquette’

give it 6 months and a review.

[FJRider]

I have said many times that shit does not always happen at such a speed to give you plenty of time to take evasive action. Until you experience such a crash you and a few others on here will never understand.

Watch your following distances ... watch your speed ... and just watch out.


It'll be your fault if you don't. But don't worry about it ... because you'll be dead.

[Akzle]

The only way retards like you will become educated will be to be involved in a not at fault crash. Then you wont think you are so cool.

you're a fuckwit

[Akzle]

I have said many times that shit does not always happen at such a speed to give you plenty of time to take evasive action. Until you experience such a crash you and a few others on here will never understand.

you're a fuckwit

[Swoop]

The only way retards like you will become educated will be to be involved in a not at fault crash. Then you wont think you are so cool.

I haven't been involved in any form of crash on a motorcycle. I am also willing to go on rider training/education courses to improve how I ride.
So both of these simple facts go entirely against your mindset and experience (your various crashes and refusal to be educated via rider training courses).

Time for you to put up or shut up. Go to a training course and if you are told that you are an expert on 2 wheels and need not return due to your level of "awesomeness", we will humbly apologise and swoon with envy over your skills.

[Akzle]

removal of all posts by it in non relevant threads.
add ‘Ignored Forum Netiquette’
.

off-topicing threads is actually kb-illegal in itself.
you and everyone else with a double-digit IQ will note that this (and most other) thread(s) had nothing to do with group rides, acc, or at-fault crashing. yet, here it is.

i'm actually starting to think it is a robot. repeating the same shit to smash search hits and disrupt the algorithm.

[eldog]

off-topicing threads is actually kb-illegal in itself.
you and everyone else with a double-digit IQ will note that this (and most other) thread(s) had nothing to do with group rides, acc, or at-fault crashing. yet, here it is.

i'm actually starting to think it is a robot. repeating the same shit to smash search hits and disrupt the algorithm.
Are you trying to say I have either a single or triple IQ?

[Akzle]

Are you trying to say I have either a single or triple IQ?

err, no. just that a certain someone is intellectually challenged/ brain damaged.

[Jeff Sichoe]

An element of truth in this article:

http://www.driven.co.nz/news/lifestyle/opinion-motorcyclists-it-s-time-to-take-some-responsibility/?ref=driven_fbpage


If it is too hot to wear the right gear, then it’s too hot to ride – something our Aussie neighbours have been pushing for years.

Get fucked.

[caseye]

err, no. just that a certain someone is intellectually challenged/ brain damaged.

And! IT's a Fuckwit.'

Come on everyone, put her on IGNORE.
Then do not, under any circumstances, look at it's posts.
I'm sure everyone who does have it on ignore, only looks to make sure they're not spouting advice that could result in a totally innocent new rider getting killed, but even so, DONT DO IT.
IT won't last long then.

[Akzle]

If you have never crashed what do you think is wrong with the way you ride? Unlike you though I have an ability to self analyse anything I do wrong and dont need to go to riding school to find out. There was another poster on here a few days ago who said they were able to self analyse too. It must be a rare skill to have.

you're a fuckwit

[ellipsis]

If you have never crashed what do you think is wrong with the way you ride? Unlike you though I have an ability to self analyse anything I do wrong and dont need to go to riding school to find out. There was another poster on here a few days ago who said they were able to self analyse too. It must be a rare skill to have.


...you are a complete and utter fuckwit...

[Jeeper]

See ignore list doesn't work if people quote the person, which means others who have put it on ignore list invariably end up seeing the crap.

[Akzle]

See ignore list doesn't work if people quote the person, which means others who have put it on ignore list invariably end up seeing the crap.

just put everyone on your ignore list <_<

[Jeeper]

I can't ignore you President Azkle, who would I vote for then?

[george formby]

If you have never crashed what do you think is wrong with the way you ride? Unlike you though I have an ability to self analyse anything I do wrong and dont need to go to riding school to find out. There was another poster on here a few days ago who said they were able to self analyse too. It must be a rare skill to have.



We are all prone to self analysis but the reason your ability is so rare stems from the fact you know fuck all about riding so the result you get is "I'm not at fault". I bet your favourite place for pondering events is A & E.
IIRC you commented in a post recently about your next crash. Not only can you read your own mind, tinged with dyslexia, but you can see into the future.

Thinking about what I just posted, you are absolutely right. You know you will crash again. It's working for you.

[Swoop]

If you have never crashed what do you think is wrong with the way you ride?

I have the ability to not be so conceited to believe that "shit won't happen" and believe that I can still improve.



Unlike you though I have an ability to self analyse anything I do wrong...
No you don't.
Your postings here confirm this. Either that or you simply confirm your pre-existing self delusions.
Go and have that riding assessment then get back to us about how you get on.

[Paul in NZ]

If you have never crashed what do you think is wrong with the way you ride? Unlike you though I have an ability to self analyse anything I do wrong and dont need to go to riding school to find out. There was another poster on here a few days ago who said they were able to self analyse too. It must be a rare skill to have.

I disagree - you have zero ability to self analyse your utter inability to get your message across and somehow change...

[Viking01]

You have obviously had a busy day online.

Cassina:
"The only way retards like you will become educated will be to be involved in a not at fault crash.
Then you wont think you are so cool." [Post #766]

Cassina:
"I have said many times that shit does not always happen at such a speed to give you plenty of time
to take evasive action. Until you experience such a crash, you and a few others on here will never
understand". [Post #770]


1. Lack of Education and Understanding

You have obviously had more experience of "not-at-fault" accidents than many of us. So, tell me :

Precisely what do you think involvement in such an accident type would suddenly "educate me in" ?
And what would I suddenly "understand" as a result ?

Please do feel free to explain.


2. And Your Point Is ?

Just assuming (for a brief instant) I accept your assertion that I will be involved in a "truly
unavoidable" not-at-fault collision at some point when out riding.

My next question to you is "Well, so what ?" What is the point that you're making ?

Making the same assertion repeatedly does not actually advance the discussion.

Are you suggesting (that after my accident):

a. That I should not change my riding behaviour and just keep riding, or
b. That I should stop riding completely, or
c. Something completely different ?

Please do feel free to explain.



3. You're Better (Cooler) Than Me

So what does "being cool" possibly have to do with the discussion ? [ Given you raised it ]

My perception is that the vast majority of riders that undertaking rider training do so:

a. As a step in helping them gain their licence, or
b. To help them improve existing riding skills (or learn specific new skills) after gaining their licence, or
c. To re-familiarise and re-skill after a long break away from riding (a midlife crisis / returning rider like me).

And if they happen to find a riding school is helpful in achieving that personal objective (improved skill level),
or in helping them ride in a safer manner (improved riding behaviour) ?

Your issue with that approach is ???

Please do feel free to explain.


Cassina:
"If you have never crashed, what do you think is wrong with the way you ride? Unlike you though I have an
ability to self analyse anything I do wrong and dont need to go to riding school to find out". [Post #780]


Your leading question immediately above. Read it again. What does it mean in plain English ?

Is crashing a pre-requisite to finding out what you're doing wrong ?

I don't know the person who posted [Swoop], but just perhaps:

a. He already has a good riding style and skill level; and
b. He has never felt the need to push his boundaries right to the point of causing a crash, and
c. He attributes his current "never crashed" status in part to having done refresher riding courses.


As for your last sentence in post #780:

Other people may also have some capability to "self analyse". But in some cases, they might not necessarily
be able to determine (i) what specifically is causing them a problem , or (ii) how to remedy the problem once
identified.

Example: Turning in to a corner too early ; Being able to emergency brake effectively.

Strangely enough, though, by engaging with a more knowledgeable person (whether riding school tutor or not),
they are often together able to pin-point the specific issue - and to work out a suitable remedy.

Your issue with that approach is ???


Lastly, it is quite possible that you are one of the "lucky few" that can both identify and solve their own problems.
Albeit after the fact in a few instances.

But in the event that you find out otherwise, I do hope that your Superman (or Superwoman) outfit continues to
be abrasion resistant. And that your cape doesn't get caught around your neck.

[george formby]

If "WE ALL" crash again it is not entirely up to us if another party causes it. This is something some on here can not get their head around. Maybe you can't either?

Oh, yes I can and I'm not alone.

Currently you have a co-spirit on talk back radio and apparently another KB member who agrees with you. Post the handle of your KB buddy with the relevant post.

Personally, I'm more a fan of awareness than analysis.

[Akzle]

If "WE ALL" crash again it is not entirely up to us if another party causes it. This is something some on here can not get their head around. Maybe you can't either?

you're a fuckwit

[Jeff Sichoe]

cassina ez ignore link;

https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/profile.php?do=addlist&userlist=ignore&u=620

don't quote the beast

[Akzle]

By bening involved in a not at fault crash you will gain an understanding that shit does not always happen at a constant speed and that thereis a luck factor.
you're a fuckwit

[EJK]

By being involved in a not at fault crash you will gain an understanding that shit does not always happen at a constant speed/timeframe and that there is a luck factor. Sorry I did not waste my time reading all your ramble but hope this comment covers most of what your ramble is about.

<img src="https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=335088&stc=1&d=1517995090" />

[granstar]

cassina ez ignore link;

https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/profile.php?do=addlist&userlist=ignore&u=620

don't quote the beast

.......................

335089

[Viking01]

By being involved in a not at fault crash you will gain an understanding that shit does not always happen at a constant speed/timeframe and that there is a luck factor. Sorry I did not waste my time reading all your ramble but hope this comment covers most of what your ramble is about.


Not a problem.

Only asked a few simple questions on your favourite topic of "not-at-fault accidents" to
prove (yet again) that you lack all ability to offer anything that remotely resembles an
intelligent response. And I wasn't disappointed.

No further reply required. Back on Ignore.

[caspernz]

Not a problem.

Only asked a few simple questions on your favourite topic of "not-at-fault accidents" to
prove (yet again) that you lack all ability to offer anything that remotely resembles an
intelligent response. And I wasn't disappointed.

No further reply required. Back on Ignore.

Oh well, you tried aye? :rolleyes::devil2:


I have better things to do with my time than write long ramblings on here unlike you.

If you're that friggin busy, feel free to stop spouting your garbage in the first place :cool::rolleyes:

[riffer]

Well,

getting back to reality for a minute. If I may talk about something with real, verifiable, accurate facts. Last weekend I spent a lot of time with Peter Sowter, Sergeant in charge of the Special Crash Unit, Wellington region. We are giving talks at the Shiny Side Up bike fest as part of the Survivor series talks, along with Brittany Morrow. Come along and hear what we've got to say if you like. We are in Hamilton weekend after this one (Feb 17), then Kapiti (Feb 25), then Auckland (March 4).

Anyway, I made the mistake of asking him if he knew anything about the motorcycle fatalities this year. And he does. In fact, he shared the special crash unit reports with me. And it doesn't make good reading.

Leaving aside the accident on the 4th Feb, there have been 12 fatalities this year. I think I can remember what they all were. My apologies if I don't remember exactly. My memory is not perfect. In three days it will be five months since a significant motorcycle accident, one the Police determined to be completely not my fault and which the other party is being sentenced in eight days for. One of them was a genuine "not at fault" accident, where a rider was taken out by a vehicle coming around a blind corner by someone on the wrong side of the road.

Three were loss of control on a corner with the rider going off the road and hitting a post or other road furniture.

One was a German tourist who had borrowed a motorcycle from a friend to ride to Castlepoint. He left near the end of the day, with not much traffic on the road. And rode 2.5 kilometres before slamming head on into a truck. He was riding on the right hand side of the road.

And seven were due to poor decision making in an overtaking manouevre, with a disconcerting amount of these being due to riders coming up to a line of cars going slowly, and making the decision to gap it past the line at speed, only to impact with the car at the front of the line, which had started to turn. In every case, other witnesses stated that the car at the front was clearly indicating their intention to turn - something not seen (it is speculated) by the motorcyclist.

I asked him if these statistics were indicative of not just fatalities, but injury accidents. He believed, subject to the information that he had from both many years in the Special Crash Unit, but also from 35 years as a motorcyclist on New Zealand roads, that there was a similar percentage of serious crashes due to the same factors.

We can argue that there are not-at-fault accidents. These are rare, despite the fact that I was involved in one. But what remains is that the line between a fatal or serious accident, and a near-miss is very very thin. I have experienced numerous near-misses in my 39 years on the road. If I look back at my accident, there were fifty things I could have done different which would have meant that the accident would have been a near-miss. I am no angel. I ride an Aprilia. Well, I did, until I slammed it at moderate speed into the drivers side passenger door of a Nissan Navara and ended up in hospital for a month, and five months later I'm still not riding due to a brachial plexus injury. I'll get there, don't worry. If you see me at the Shiny Side Up, come and say hi. I'll tell you all about how learning emergency braking through RideForever training saved my life.

Let's get off this whole derail about not-at-fault accidents. It's a rabbit hole.

The reason why the Police rabbit on about speed is because the truth of the matter is, that if you are going to crash, and it might just happen, the more speed that you're carrying the higher the kinetic energy that has to be released in the crash. Kinetic energy is the energy that all bodies in motion have. And the formula is Ke = 1/2 mass times the speed squared. So the impact of speed is hugely more than the impact of weight. So the more you can slow down in a crash situation the more likely you are to survive. I was doing 100 or thereabouts when I saw the car pull out. I was doing just on 60 when I hit the Navara. If I'd been doing 110 when I put the brakes on, I would have been doing 70 when I hit the Navara. That would have most likely put me in a wheelchair. If I'd been doing 120 when I put the brakes on, I would have been doing 90 when I hit the Navara. That's not survivable.

Not a good thought. They told me that in the hospital. And I thought about it a lot.

My ward mate had crashed his Hayabusa when he spun out and highsided into a truck parked on the side of the road. He hit it doing about 60. He broke his pelvis, and bruised a whole load of his body. I broke my left fibia just below my knee, my tibia was cracked half way down and I broke the rear malleolus (broken ankle) of the tibia too. I cracked my sternum and cracked the acromion (back of the shoulder socket) and tore the ligaments in the rotator cuff. My head was forced nearly on to my left shoulder, stretching the nerves C5-C8, paralysing my right arm. Subsequent to the accident I have regained (through sheer bloody mindedness and pain) the use of my left leg and left ankle, gradually (in this order) the fingers of my right arm, then the hand, then the lower arm (mostly), then the bicep, then part of the tricep, then the teres minor, the supraspinatus, teres major and triceps brachii long head.

Students of anatomy will say "what about the deltoid and the infraspinatus?" Well, I'm not so lucky there. It would appear that the axillary nerve ain't coming back. Despite the MRI saying there is no reason why it shouldn't come back, I'm in that not-so-nice position of having time run out on waiting dfor the nerves to grow back... wait too long and the muscle simply won't work once the nerves start to fire. When a nerve is stretched but not torn in two, it dies back from the point of injury back to the spinal cord, then grows back about a millimetre a day. An inch a month. I have a bit to go I suppose. Next week I talk to the plastic surgeon and we may have to make a decision. Sacrifice a working nerve to try and get the deltoid back, or wait for the nerve to come back... and if it doesn't, then it may be too late for nerve graft surgery. And there's no certainty that a nerve graft will bring back the deltoid anyway.

So, in the meantime, I keep doing the exercises. Because I may have to face the reality that I may never have that muscle again. And that's okay. I can live without being able to swim, to throw a ball, to bowl overarm, and to lift my arm above shoulder level. Because I will still be able to ride. And there's plenty of people more fucked up than me riding around.

And I'm still alive. A lot of people who crash into things at 60km/hr don't survive. Only 60 km/hr. I couldn't believe it. What kind of pussy gets hurt falling off at 60! Ones like you an me it would appear. Trouble is, I like going fast. I love the feel of a fast motorcycle with great handling. But will I do it on the road again? I'll be thinking real hard about that. Probably do it on rare occasions. But not daily like I used to. Because it fucking hurts when you get it wrong. Even though I'm doing really good it still hurts.

I'm not trying to convince anyone not to have fun. Not to have a great ride. Fuck I hope you all do until the day you die. But I do want you all to know that when it goes wrong (and it sometimes does) you had better be ready - through training, good choices, and maybe stupid dumb luck - and I hope you get through without having to experience the pain I have.

See you all at the Shiny Side Up this month. I look like this. Come say "Hi Simon."

335104

[caseye]

Will catch you up here in Dorkland Rif, still bloody glad yer still walking and talking, take the time to heal good mate.

[Honest Andy]

Cor that was a bit to read... But worth it :yes: Hard to argue with the hard stats

[Akzle]

I have better things to do with my time than write long ramblings on here unlike you.

no you don't.
you're a fuckwit

[riffer]

no you don't.
you're a fuckwit


Sorry about my long ramble then...

[EJK]

Well,

getting back to reality for a minute. If I may talk about something with real, verifiable, accurate facts. Last weekend I spent a lot of time with Peter Sowter, Sergeant in charge of the Special Crash Unit, Wellington region. We are giving talks at the Shiny Side Up bike fest as part of the Survivor series talks, along with Brittany Morrow. Come along and hear what we've got to say if you like. We are in Hamilton weekend after this one (Feb 17), then Kapiti (Feb 25), then Auckland (March 4).

****Snip****

See you all at the Shiny Side Up this month. I look like this. Come say "Hi Simon."

335104

Wow. Thanks for sharing. If I was in Auck/ Hamilton I'd definitely drop by and say hi.

[Jeeper]

Sorry about my long ramble then...I don't think Akzle was saying that to you. It is a sobering reality that a lot of people don't realize. Its simple things like braking in front of a heavy vehicle, a bike or a car might stop but the truck needs so much more distance to release that kinetic energy.

[awayatc]

Sorry about my long ramble then...

That was anything but a ramble.......

It was a bloody good read.

Thanks

[granstar]

Thank you for sharing Simon. Hope you mend well.

[Blackbird]

Humbling, Simon...... thank you :not:

[Dadpole]

Thanks Riffer. That piece made wading through this thread worthwhile.

[Woodman]

Cheers Riffer. Means a lot that you shared this.

[Akzle]

I don't think Akzle was saying that to you. It is a sobering reality that a lot of people don't realize. Its simple things like braking in front of a heavy vehicle, a bike or a car might stop but the truck needs so much more distance to release that kinetic energy.

i'm going to go ahead and physics you there.
a truck will stop faster than a bike, all other things being equal. it has m0ar mass and therefore more gravity acting on it to bring it to inertia.

watch crash vids. if you throw a bike down the road it goes for fucken ages. a truck comes to a stop comparatively quickly.

[Jeeper]

i'm going to go ahead and physics you there.
a truck will stop faster than a bike, all other things being equal. it has m0ar mass and therefore more gravity acting on it to bring it to inertia.

watch crash vids. if you throw a bike down the road it goes for fucken ages. a truck comes to a stop comparatively quickly.A ship and a dingy doing same speed, just based on water resistance and gravitational forces, who would come to a stop faster?

[Akzle]

A ship and a dingy doing same speed, just based on water resistance and gravitational forces, who would come to a stop faster?

describe this "dinghy"

[Scuba_Steve]

I give to you the Volvo big rig, 40 tonnes stopping faster than you can stop a 1.6 tonne cage; yes they weigh more but they also haz more brakes & this one even fancy elematronics. No human interaction required

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ridS396W2BY

& here it is not hitting a stupid kid, whom will hopefully now be more intelligence on the road now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0myPp2NmOqo


Dependent on operator & vehicle features a bike can stop faster than a car but a big rig can stop faster than both

[Moi]

A sobering read.

All the best.

[nzspokes]

335104

Thanks for that Simon, may I steal the post to post in other places? I feel it will be reality check.

All the best.

[Daffyd]

Dependent on operator & vehicle features a bike can stop faster than a car but a big rig can stop faster than both

I recall back in my yoof, hearing the story of an articulated flat deck carrying a dozer on a long straight at night in the Lumsden area. This truck was fitted with air brakes, not all that common in those days. He came across a woman parked in the middle of the lane in her Morris Minor with no lights.

The controller for said brakes was a type of ratchet device with ten notches. He had never been past no.3. On seeing the lady in front he applied full air braking, notch no.10. When he recovered from the initial shock he found he was sitting on the road, still in his cab with his cab touching the back bumper of the MM, the bulldozer sitting on the road behind him, and the flatdeck at the back.

[Murray]

Anyway, I made the mistake of asking him if he knew anything about the motorcycle fatalities this year. And he does. In fact, he shared the special crash unit reports with me. And it doesn't make good reading.

Leaving aside the accident on the 4th Feb, there have been 12 fatalities this year. I think I can remember what they all were. My apologies if I don't remember exactly. My memory is not perfect. In three days it will be five months since a significant motorcycle accident, one the Police determined to be completely not my fault and which the other party is being sentenced in eight days for. One of them was a genuine "not at fault" accident, where a rider was taken out by a vehicle coming around a blind corner by someone on the wrong side of the road.

Three were loss of control on a corner with the rider going off the road and hitting a post or other road furniture.

One was a German tourist who had borrowed a motorcycle from a friend to ride to Castlepoint. He left near the end of the day, with not much traffic on the road. And rode 2.5 kilometres before slamming head on into a truck. He was riding on the right hand side of the road.

And seven were due to poor decision making in an overtaking manouevre, with a disconcerting amount of these being due to riders coming up to a line of cars going slowly, and making the decision to gap it past the line at speed, only to impact with the car at the front of the line, which had started to turn. In every case, other witnesses stated that the car at the front was clearly indicating their intention to turn - something not seen (it is speculated) by the motorcyclist.
335104

So the big question is "How many were involved in a group ride trying to keep up"?

[nerrrd]

Well, getting back to reality for a minute...when it goes wrong (and it sometimes does) you had better be ready - through training, good choices, and maybe stupid dumb luck - and I hope you get through without having to experience the pain I have.

Thanks for posting this, a very well written reality check (Kiwibiker?? Reality??? Weird.)

I wish I could say with confidence that I will be ready, but I suspect dumb luck will be the biggest factor if or when the time comes.

Hope your recovery continues.

[neels]

At last someone else who is bright enough unlike others on here who see there is a luck factor and its the luck factor that will save you if someone else is at fault, for the simple reason it is them and not you who controls the speed and distance from you when they screw up.
Did you not read the bit where it was described as a not-at-fault accident, but things could have been done by the rider to avoid or minimise the accident?

Complete abdication of responsibility also implies complete abdication of thinking.

Quote Akzle[ you're a fuckwit [/Akzle

[FJRider]

Yes I read that bit but when its a another party screwing up he could have either been going much faster or much slower and in both cases he would have missed the car that did not give way. There was a crash near Methven a few years back where a car driver did not give way and killed a woman and 3 kids (I think) and it was reported in the media the car not at fault was doing the speed limit but had they been going faster or slower they would have avoided the car that hit them. As I said before its a luck thing if someone else screws up coming towards you if you are able to get away from them. It has been said there are many crashes that happen below the speed limit so slowing down will not necessarily save you.

One of the causes of accidents that's pretty common is failing to give way. Expect that others will not give way. So if you see vehicles waiting to pull out into your path ... watch them ... the DRIVER especially Even slow down a little (you could also flash your lights if you are unsure they have seen you) ... especially if you are at open road speeds. By the risk of losing a few seconds of your busy day ... you reduce the risk of losing the rest of your life. You don't (usually) need to stop and give way to them ... but slowing gives more time to brake ... should you need too.

OR ... you could do nothing (IGNORE them completely as you are in the right) and then (possibly) let them kill you. The choice is your's ... walking away from an accident is preferable to being carried away (dead or alive).

[FJRider]

So the big question is "How many were involved in a group ride trying to keep up"?


A statement made in jest I assume ... BUT ... as I recall ... one rider killed collided with another rider (he/she knew) that they were following.

[FJRider]

At last someone else who is bright enough unlike others on here who see there is a luck factor and its the luck factor that will save you if someone else is at fault, for the simple reason it is them and not you who controls the speed and distance from you when they screw up.

Reading isn't your strong point is it ... did you not read this bit ... ??? you make your own luck.


come and say hi. I'll tell you all about how learning emergency braking through RideForever training saved my life.

[Akzle]

At last someone else who is bright enough unlike others on here who see there is a luck factor and its the luck factor that will save you if someone else is at fault, for the simple reason it is them and not you who controls the speed and distance from you when they screw up.

you're a fuckwit

[Akzle]

Yes I read that bit but when its a another party screwing up he could have either been going much faster or much slower and in both cases he would have missed the car that did not give way. There was a crash near Methven a few years back where a car driver did not give way and killed a woman and 3 kids (I think) and it was reported in the media the car not at fault was doing the speed limit but had they been going faster or slower they would have avoided the car that hit them. As I said before its a luck thing if someone else screws up coming towards you if you are able to get away from them. It has been said there are many crashes that happen below the speed limit so slowing down will not necessarily save you.

you're a fuckwit

[nerrrd]

Thanks for posting this, a very well written reality check (Kiwibiker?? Reality??? Weird.)

I wish I could say with confidence that I will be ready, but I suspect dumb luck will be the biggest factor if or when the time comes.

Hope your recovery continues.

Quoting myself, sigh...wouldn’t want anyone to misinterpret what I’m saying here, I’m still doing everything I can to prepare myself, including attending multiple Rideforever and sometimes other courses every year (which shock horror involves riding in groups also), trying to improve my observational skills as much as I can, and trying to practise the skills I’ve been taught on a daily basis.

I don’t think I would dare get on a bike today without doing all of the above and taking responsibility for myself - but sometimes I get distracted, sometimes I get tired, and sometimes I make mistakes ‘cos I’m not perfect and don’t claim to know everything I need to know about riding already, unlike some.

But I’m aware of my personal limitations and it’s entirely possible that one day I won’t see the warning signs, or I’ll cock up a corner or who knows what else and I’ll need some dumb luck to get away with it - or I won’t.

[Berries]

A statement made in jest I assume ... BUT ... as I recall ... one rider killed collided with another rider (he/she knew) that they were following.
No idea how to link to actual posts but I made some comments in post 58 on this page - https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/184875-Call-for-motorcyclists-to-stop-lane-splitting-overtaking-after-10-riders-die-in-Jan/page4

Two more added since then, both overtaking traffic when a vehicle turned right.

There is group riding and then there is group riding. Waste of time trying to explain that on here though.

[Akzle]

No idea how to link to actual posts but I made some comments in post 58 on this page - https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/184875-Call-for-motorcyclists-to-stop-lane-splitting-overtaking-after-10-riders-die-in-Jan/page4

Two more added since then, both overtaking traffic when a vehicle turned right.

There is group riding and then there is group riding. Waste of time trying to explain that on here though.

pick some post-specific text that doesn't appear on the page (like the number) and append "?=TEXT" to the URL. ie:

https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/184875-Call-for-motorcyclists-to-stop-lane-splitting-overtaking-after-10-riders-die-in-Jan/page4?=#58


it's inelegant as it wont work depending on peoples settings (# posts/page, ie) kb will have uid numbers for posts that's getting a bit srs

[george formby]

No idea how to link to actual posts but I made some comments in post 58 on this page - https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/184875-Call-for-motorcyclists-to-stop-lane-splitting-overtaking-after-10-riders-die-in-Jan/page4

Two more added since then, both overtaking traffic when a vehicle turned right.

There is group riding and then there is group riding. Waste of time trying to explain that on here though.

I've had this twice in the last few months. Not riders, cagers..... Both times I've been in a line of traffic held up by a right turning car and both times ended up with a 4 x 4 alongside slamming on the anchors with nowhere to go. Fortunately, 4 x 4's take awhile to get up to speed. No doubt the overtaking driver figured that the slow queue had a tourist or silvertop at the front. A very common scenario round here.
It really brings home what I was told by an instructor years ago, consider whats at the side of the road not just whats on it.

Impatience and assumptions cause havoc. Think before you throttle...

Speaking of which, a behaviour I have seen a lot of lately, is riders sitting up a vehicles arse and jinking about until they can squirt through a gap. 99% from an over represented and loud piped group with weird helmets.
Seeing this type of riding and thinking about how many ways it could go wrong makes me wonder if they live in a fantasy bubble.
AFS, another f$%^&*g statistic.

[Murray]

So if you see vehicles waiting to pull out into your path ... watch them ... the DRIVER especially Even slow down a little . slowing gives more time to brake ... should you need too.

OR ... you could do nothing and then (possibly) let them kill you. The choice is your's ... walking away from an accident is preferable to being carried away (dead or alive).


But if you are in a line of traffic though slowing down suddenly could get you rear ended. If I see someone coming up to an intersection that I am about to pass I prepare to brake but dont actually slow down. I may pull towards the centre line too.

Amazing how you can change something so quickly. Gone from "even slow down a little" to your "slowing down suddenly". Just makes all your I have seen, have read, have been told, the crap it is.

As for the second part regarding "the choice is your's" again your stupidity is evident. So you carry on same speed but get ready to brake and may pull towards the centre line too. Is that it? Don't like your chances!

Great post and very wise FJrider

[george formby]

I'm gonna put this link here because I can't be bothered starting a new thread or finding somewhere better to put it. It is very pertinent to policing...

Texting, really? (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/101255423/mike-odonnell-time-to-get-our-act-together-on-cellphones-and-road-safety)

I have only ever seen this in Europe, people on maxi scooters.

[Akzle]

But if you are in a line of traffic though slowing down suddenly could get you rear ended. If I see someone coming up to an intersection that I am about to pass I prepare to brake but dont actually slow down. I may pull towards the centre line too.

you're a fuckwit


The police/NZTA are yet to recognise that riding in groups can be more dangerous than riding alone and maybe data needs to be taken on this fact.

you're a fuckwit


Have you not considered that if you find motorcycling so dangerous its perhaps time you gave up riding? Riding can not be a very relaxing thing for you to do and if I felt like you I would have given up riding years ago.

you're a fuckwit

[Voltaire]

Quoting myself, sigh...wouldn’t want anyone to misinterpret what I’m saying here, I’m still doing everything I can to prepare myself, including attending multiple Rideforever and sometimes other courses every year (which shock horror involves riding in groups also), trying to improve my observational skills as much as I can, and trying to practise the skills I’ve been taught on a daily basis.

I don’t think I would dare get on a bike today without doing all of the above and taking responsibility for myself - but sometimes I get distracted, sometimes I get tired, and sometimes I make mistakes ‘cos I’m not perfect and don’t claim to know everything I need to know about riding already, unlike some.

But I’m aware of my personal limitations and it’s entirely possible that one day I won’t see the warning signs, or I’ll cock up a corner or who knows what else and I’ll need some dumb luck to get away with it - or I won’t.

I think you will be fine as some of the signs you need to look out for are:
repeating yourself over and over on the internet
repeating yourself over and over on the internet
repeating yourself over and over on the internet




Honda 750/4 prices are plummeting as research shows they cause the above.

[kiwi cowboy]

Katman used to have a one line message, it IS as relavent today as it was then. Personal Responsibility take possession of it and make sure you don't end up a statistic.


This Quote is pretty much what my father taught us kids at a young age and was aimed at life in general.
Bloody well true too:yes::yes:.

Some of the things we did as young kids would make the feds hair curl and probably get us taken away in this day and age but being able to judge responsibility meant were still live lol.

[FJRider]

But if you are in a line of traffic though slowing down suddenly could get you rear ended. If I see someone coming up to an intersection that I am about to pass I prepare to brake but dont actually slow down. I may pull towards the centre line too.

Unless you're short sighted ... you should be able to see vehicles waiting at intersections in plenty of time to slow down a bit. If somebody rear ends you ... you wont get pregnant because it wasn't YOUR fault ... :cool:

Going towards the center-line is not that great idea ... that is where that vehicle will be trying to get to. Moving towards the center-line will just ensure you meet them there.

[FJRider]

The police/NZTA are yet to recognise that riding in groups can be more dangerous than riding alone and maybe data needs to be taken on this fact.

Consider this ... group riding is NOT the issue. HOW you ride in a group CAN be THE issue.

Careless overtaking and following too closely (and speed [your admitted failings]) ... are the two main group ride issues.

[FJRider]

Have you not considered that if you find motorcycling so dangerous its perhaps time you gave up riding? Riding can not be a very relaxing thing for you to do and if I felt like you I would have given up riding years ago.

With all the accidents YOU have had ... do YOU still ride ... ???

[george formby]

My thinking for moving towards the centre line if they are not going to give way there is a longer time lag before they could hit and with a bit of luck that time lag would allow me to power away from them. If your riding school does not teach this dont try it.

Power and luck to avoid a possible collision?

That goes straight into the top 3 most dangerous posts ever.

[caspernz]

My thinking for moving towards the centre line if they are not going to give way there is a longer time lag before they could hit and with a bit of luck that time lag would allow me to power away from them. If your riding school does not teach this dont try it.

You really need to stop giving advice :facepalm::shit::innocent::shutup::laugh:



Power and luck to avoid a possible collision?

That goes straight into the top 3 most dangerous posts ever.

Shame that posting garbage like she keeps doing doesn't incur an automatic lifetime ban from KB...:blink::confused::laugh:

[AllanB]

Power and luck to avoid a possible collision?

That goes straight into the top 3 most dangerous posts ever.


Don't worry darling I'll pull out ........... 9 months later.

[awayatc]

Cuntina strikes again.....

[Akzle]

My thinking for moving towards the centre line if they are not going to give way there is a longer time lag before they could hit and with a bit of luck that time lag would allow me to power away from them. If your riding school does not teach this dont try it.

you're a fuckwit

[nzspokes]

So you have never heard that by applying a lot of power it can help you get out of certain tricky situations?
I am guessing whenever you overtake anything then you never exceed the speed limit?

Its sad to see Riffer's message lost in your stupid drivel.

[Woodman]

So you have never heard that by applying a lot of power it can help you get out of certain tricky situations?
I am guessing whenever you overtake anything then you never exceed the speed limit?

What tricky situations will applying a lot of power help you get out of said tricky situations?

Also passing isn't a tricky situation.

[Voltaire]

What tricky situations will applying a lot of power help you get out of said tricky situations?

Also passing isn't a tricky situation.

Have you not been left behind and had to wait ages in the line for your organic free range soy milk trim latte because you only had 50 HP?

[AllanB]

Passing non school busses as you never know if they are going to pull out during your overtake.



Eh??????????????????????????????????????????????:f acepalm:

[Viking01]

My thinking for moving towards the centre line if they are not going to give way there is a longer time lag before they could hit and with a bit of luck that time lag would allow me to power away from them. If your riding school does not teach this dont try it.

And I thought that I'd seen it all. But there is obviously no limit to your stupidity.
And your latest post has provided yet more evidence.

So, as you ride into a zone where a car may well pull out on you (moving across
and blocking your lane as it turns) - and where likelihood of collision increases
as you get ever closer, you think (?) :

1. That without having braked much earlier (but simply positioning to the right
hand side of your lane), there will still be enough space and time to allow you
to avoid a collision ;

2. That with a "bit of luck", you will somehow be able to "power away from them"
(as they move laterally across in front of you).


There is a very good reason why a certified rider training school would never teach
its students such a response.

The only words of value in your post were the last ones (" don't try it").

Perhaps you would now be so good as to add a tagline to your KB profile, reading
something like:

Cassina : Clearly illustrating the difference between certified and certifiable.

[Woodman]

If the road is wet for example and the traffic light goes amber I will often power on through rather than attempt to stop in case i lose it in the middle of the intersection braking suddenly.
Passing non school busses as you never know if they are going to pull out during your overtake.

You must only ride/drive on remote country roads if you do not see overtaking as being tricky? If you read the article posted in this thread it says about how dangerous overtaking can be. Many people die each year getting overtakes wrong and if overtaking was as easy as you experience no one would die would they?

Please nobody take this fuckwits advice.

[Moi]

It's sad to see Riffer's message lost in your stupid drivel.

+1

Jeez Wayne... is it something to do with the water where you, the "C" person, live?

[Woodman]

Passing non school busses as you never know if they are going to pull out during your overtake.




I am not giving advice fuckwit I am just saying what I do. There is a difference!!


Sounds like advice to me.

[Moi]

If the road is wet for example and the traffic light goes amber I will often power on through rather than attempt to stop in case i lose it in the middle of the intersection braking suddenly...

If road is wet then why are you not being more cautious, especially approaching a traffic light control intersection when the lights have been in your favour for some time? They are bound to change - Sodd's Law - so check for following traffic and be prepared, like a Boy Scout.

As for "lose it", news for you - think you might have lost it some time ago...


... Passing non school buses as you never know if they are going to pull out during your overtake...

Do you know the correct speed to pass a school bus that has stopped to board or alight children?

What's so difficult about easing off the throttle and letting the bus go first?

[Jeeper]

865 posts so far, only 1 meaningful post so far.

[neels]

What's so difficult about easing off the throttle and letting the bus go first?
Obviously far too difficult, but goes well with a previous post about speeding up at the end of passing lanes to stop people overtaking.

There seem to be many aspects of the thing where ignorance is the predominant characteristic.

[AllanB]

Jeez Wayne... is it something to do with the water where you, the "C" person, live?


Ironically a couple weeks back it was reveled that there was a issue with the Council water supply bore heads and they now need to chlorinate Christchurch's water.

[caspernz]

Ironically a couple weeks back it was reveled that there was a issue with the Council water supply bore heads and they now need to chlorinate Christchurch's water.

Oh boy, there's been a problem a lot longer with cassina spouting her brand of "advice" on KB :weird::weird::weird:

When it comes to exploring the depths of her stupidity, I'm constantly amazed by how much more garbage is spouted forth by her :no::laugh::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm ::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

But hey, best I just shut up and walk away...:innocent::shutup::innocent::shutup:

[AllanB]

But hey, best I just shut up and walk away...:innocent::shutup::innocent::shutup:

It's a struggle though - like watching a kid stick their finger into a mouse trap, do you tell them NO, or let them learn a life lesson?

[Voltaire]

It's a struggle though - like watching a kid stick their finger into a mouse trap, do you tell them NO, or let them learn a life lesson?

Not really, if it was at a pub you would say " is that the time I must be off".

Its amusing anyone replies really especially those TLTR ones.

[Woodman]

It's a struggle though - like watching a kid stick their finger into a mouse trap, do you tell them NO, or let them learn a life lesson?

I tried ignoring it, but its stupidity cannot remain unanswered. I mean, seriously? speeding up to get past a stopped bus not knowing what may walk out or drive out from in front of it? That level of fuckwittery has to be answered.

[Moi]

I tried ignoring it, but its stupidity cannot remain unanswered. I mean, seriously? speeding up to get past a stopped bus not knowing what may walk out or drive out from in front of it? That level of fuckwittery has to be answered.

speeding up to get past a stopped bus not knowing what may walk out or drive out from in front of it (www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTmLop-QhVk)

[Murray]

I remember some months back someone on here was almost taken out by someone doing a last minute overtake at the end of a passing lane.


Amazing how you can change something so quickly. Gone from "even slow down a little" to your "slowing down suddenly". Just makes all your I have seen, have read, have been told, the crap it is.



I remember some months back someone on here was almost taken out by someone doing a last minute overtake at the end of a passing lane.


PROVIDE QUOTE PLEASE. Sick of I heard, I saw, I read with no backup

Piss off dick and after comments on this thread the only reason I think moderators leave you on this site is for entertainment value cause you are dangerous!

[riffer]

Thanks for that Simon, may I steal the post to post in other places? I feel it will be reality check.

All the best.

Sure thing nzspokes.

Show them this too.

https://www.facebook.com/RideForeverNZ/videos/547385992298957/

[riffer]

You would have to be the only person in NZ complaining about people speeding up at the end of passing lanes? I bet you would be one that slows down to say that? Having someone try and overtake when you are running out of road is not a desirable thing and I remember some months back someone on here was almost taken out by someone doing a last minute overtake at the end of a passing lane. By speeding up at the end you are not likely to be at risk from a last minute overtaker.


Please. Stop giving out your advice. It's appallingly bad advice, and most people who followed it would end up badly hurt, or worse.

It's time for you to calm down and take some time out now. Well past time. I am so pleased that your opinions are getting short shrift here as every time I read one of them my sphincter starts to pucker before I get half way through.

Please. Stop.

[Graystone]

Maybe if you get hit by a bus pulling out failing to give way to you only then you will understand why I do what I do. But in the mean time continue trusting that bus drivers will always see you and continue to give way.

Is a dog driving the bus? is petty revenge the reason you do what you do?

[FJRider]

By speeding up at the end you are not likely to be at risk from a last minute overtaker.

By speeding up ... you usually find what was an overtaking maneuver ... turns into a race.

The kiwi desire to be in front.

[FJRider]

No one has tried to race me yet.

No one cares.

[Woodman]

Maybe if you get hit by a bus pulling out failing to give way to you only then you will understand why I do what I do. But in the mean time continue trusting that bus drivers will always see you and continue to give way.

So you have been hit by a bus as well? Did you not see the bus in front of you? are you not aware that motorcycles are not overly visible in a bus mirror? And the best part is, after you were hit by a bus pulling out in front of you, your response now is when you see a bus you speed up? yeah the bus driver will really be expecting that.:killingme:killingme:killingme

[caseye]

Please. Stop giving out your advice. It's appallingly bad advice, and most people who followed it would end up badly hurt, or worse.

It's time for you to calm down and take some time out now. Well past time. I am so pleased that your opinions are getting short shrift here as every time I read one of them my sphincter starts to pucker before I get half way through.

Please. Stop.

Working on it Riff,believe me.

[caspernz]

Please. Stop giving out your advice. It's appallingly bad advice, and most people who followed it would end up badly hurt, or worse.

It's time for you to calm down and take some time out now. Well past time. I am so pleased that your opinions are getting short shrift here as every time I read one of them my sphincter starts to pucker before I get half way through.

Please. Stop.

First up Simon, thanks for sharing your story. Glad you're still with us. It takes courage to share what happened to yourself.

The unfortunate part here is that cassina keeps interjecting, spouting all kinds of poor advice. It may well be intended to be helpful, yet it's anything but, for most of the principles are the wrong way around. Oh how I wish we could have a blocking feature on threads, so numb skulls could be prevented from derailing sensible discussions. Not a fan of slagging someone off on a forum, much prefer to do that to the person concerned one on one :shutup::innocent:

Let's turn this into a chorus. Cassina, stop spouting your advice. Most of it is just plain wrong. So just give it a rest, unless you enjoy copping flack :weird::weird:

[nzspokes]

It's not advise I am just saying what I do. What would you do if a bus tried to pull out without noticing you go past? The bigger a vehicle the more blind spots they have did you know and I see nothing wrong with trying to stay out of them unlike yourself and some others on here.

You really have problems dont you? :no:

[Honest Andy]

No one has tried to race me yet.

Race?

No no no... that was overtaking, to get waaaaaay out in front

ahead of the destructive bow-wave...

[Akzle]

i cbf multiquoting the cunt.

c*ssina is a fuckwit. of the highest order.

y'all faggots still engaging the cunt with discussion and shit: don't.


c*ssina is a fuckwit.

[awayatc]

So you have been hit by a bus as well?

That explains it..........

[nzspokes]

No I think you lot are the ones with the problem if you do not think a bus could pull out without seeing you.
Maybe your riding school is yet to teach you how to take evasive action if a bus or any other vehicle decides to pull out without seeing you.

You are Bipolar?

[Woodman]

No I think you lot are the ones with the problem if you do not think a bus could pull out without seeing you.
Maybe your riding school is yet to teach you how to take evasive action if a bus or any other vehicle decides to pull out without seeing you.

So do you speed up when you see any potential hazard, or just buses?

Also. Everyone on here is aware that a bus could pull out without seeing us.

[Voltaire]

You are Bipolar?

Aspergers

Probably intelligent but had a career marked by inability to engage with colleagues, hence being here and despite being asked to stop just

ploughs on. I wonder if his wife has to listen to hours of " and I keep telling them..."

" yes Dear" continues knitting covers for Cassinas bowling balls.

or just really bored and enjoys winding up the easily wound up.

[Akzle]

I do this as a result of being knocked off my bike by a car doing a U turn. So if everyone on here is aware they could be knocked off by a bus pulling out what is the problem with doing a centre line hug at speed to try and stay as far from the bus/vehicle as possible? As I said no one else has come up with a better idea to handle such a situation so why rubbish mine.

you. are. a. fuckwit.

[riffer]

As I said no one else has come up with a better idea to handle such a situation so why rubbish mine.


Okay.


When in a situation where you observe a bus at the roadside and you are advancing upon it. First thing - ease off the throttle, cover brake. Observe those alighting the bus - has the queue finished? what is the driver doing? Front wheels - are they turned out or moving? That happens before the bus moves forward? Where's my exit? Can't see one? Then slowing down... I'd rather go slower than faster in this situation. Be aware you may need to brake hard, so shifting my butt back on the seat so I don't raise the rear too hard - what's left? What's right? What's behind that I have to be aware of?

Note all the things going through my mind as I approach a bus at the side of the road. Not one of those is "I'll get ready to gap it."

Where your advice falls short is that it is overly aggressive. And it's that aggression that causes you problems on the road. I can recommend a RideForever instructor who can help you with your riding. The crashes you have had suggest to me that you have an observation issue - you are not paying attention to the reactions of other road users, and you are not modifying your riding in the appropriate manner when you come across the dangers on the road.

It's a parallel with your interactions on this site. I wonder if it also parallels reality outside of this forum. Perhaps it's the Universe trying to tell you something?

Tell you what. Give David Keilty a ring. His phone number is 021 168 6320. He is the man in charge of the RideForever system in New Zealand. Tell him Simon Gotlieb suggested you call him. Explain to him why you think that the riding instructors in this country have got it all wrong and explain your ideas on how motorcycle safety could be done better.

Then shut up and have a good listen to what he will tell you in reply. And anything he suggests - you go and do it.

And then. Once you've done that. You come back on here and tell us all what you have learned. And how it has changed your thinking on motorcycle safety. Because I 100% guarantee that it will profoundly change your opinion on the subject. I have read you lambasting instructors and IAM members on this forum, accusing them on not knowing what they are talking about.

It's time to do something Cassina. Will you step up to the plate and take that challenge? Call Dave now. He's been at the Burt Monro for the last few days so he'll be in a good mood.

[Swoop]

It's not advise I am just saying what I do.
..........
335154

[caspernz]

I do this as a result of being knocked off my bike by a car doing a U turn. So if everyone on here is aware they could be knocked off by a bus pulling out what is the problem with doing a centre line hug at speed to try and stay as far from the bus/vehicle as possible? As I said no one else has come up with a better idea to handle such a situation so why rubbish mine.

The reason your logic fails, regardless of past experiences, is that maintaining speed or accelerating into what's technically called "a developing situation" is just plain wrong. If you drop off speed, position to see and/or be seen, it increases your time to react and thus avoid an accident. On just this one point alone, a new rider who takes your approach increases their exposure to risk, by doing the exact opposite of what is proven to work.

Those of us who have partaken in a modicum of post license training, can only but shake our heads at your outlook. Good luck with recovering from your condition.

[riffer]

But will slowing down necessarily mean you will be seen in the blindspot of the bus? Slowing down runs the risk of you being rear ended by someone following. With my way the proximity to the bus is at its maximum so I personally see it as being safer but if you feel doing it the riding school way is safer for you all the best. No I do not need a lesson from a riding school because in a situation where another party is at fault it is them and not you that controls the speed and distance they are from you when they screw up and it comes down to luck as to whether they give you any time to avoid them or not. There was a media story from a riding school last week where the instructor claimed he could teach you to sense when someone else is about to screw up before they actually do. So he in effect was saying he could teach you to sense a car coming around a bend on the wrong side of the road before it comes into your view which is absolute bullshit. Riding schools are fine as far as teaching you how to ride
but to say they can prevent you from coming to grief as a result of the actions of others thats where they lose credibility with me. Dont let my view put you off your belief in the riding school gospel though.

Oh dear. You truly are a fucking idiot. I can only hope that when you do kill yourself (because its just a matter of time) that you don't hurt anyone else in the process.

I will continue to improve my riding and I will be seeking the advice of those with greater knowledge than me. I'm truly sorry that you are so blinkered in your view that you are unable to consider anything else but your opinion.

I guess Akzle was right.

You are a fuckwit. Don't engage with me further. I'm really not interested in the opinions of those who will not consider that there is a better way. Goodbye. Consider yourself ignored.

[Viking01]

I do this as a result of being knocked off my bike by a car doing a U turn. So if everyone on here is aware they could be knocked off by a bus pulling out what is the problem with doing a centre line hug at speed to try and stay as far from the bus/vehicle as possible? As I said no one else has come up with a better idea to handle such a situation so why rubbish mine.


What is the problem with "Doing a centre line hug at speed" ?

The last two words. "At speed".


No one else has come up with a better idea to handle such a situation.

Oh, but they have. Start braking. Position well. Be prepared to stop if necessary.


Why rubbish your suggestion ?

Because it's unsafe riding behaviour.


Hope this is not TLTR for you.