I can't see the problem with our road toll?

[swbarnett]

In the 12 months to 21 December 2007 there were 421 deaths on our roads.

The registered vehicle fleet as at 30 June 2006 was 2,786,389 motorcycles, cars and vans.

Using these figures (obviously there will be slightly more vehicles on the roads this year than last) the number of deaths / vehicle in the past twelve months is 0.00015

If you assume that the average vehicle travels 10,000km / year (can't find the actual figure, would love it if someone has it?) the figure for deaths / km is 0.000000015

I think it's fairly obvious from these calculations that the death toll in NZ is well within the realms of natural human falability and is already effectively zero.

I strongly doubt it is possible to eliminate the death toll completely. We must also ask ourselves if we should even be trying. To me, the cost of pushing the driving public with measures that are way beyond anything that can be remotely considered humane and in no way fit the (non) problem is far too high.

Do we want a population of organic entities that exist only as zombies (for that is what the current concentration on absolute safety will inevitably produce) or a population of sentient beings that can actually think for themselves given the chance to do so?

Information source: land transport web site

[Mikkel]

I'm afraid the battle was lost many years ago... we are all effectively drones.

On another note, there are quite a lot of unregistered vehicles out there. I think that is a bigger problem.

[skidMark]

On another note, there are quite a lot of unregistered vehicles out there. I think that is a bigger problem.

come again?

[xwhatsit]

Well, you're representing the figures in a slightly odd way, which my whiskey-addled brain might be misinterpreting, but I think there's better ways of saying those figures. The way you're writing them, if the number was `1', then that would mean there was one death for every registered vehicle. So you will never get large-looking figures like that.

The more normal way of writing it would be to divide the number of registered vehicles by the number of deaths. Giving ~6619, which means that there was one death for every 6619 vehicles in New Zealand. Out of 2.7 million or so. Which doesn't sound quite so peachy.

People always say `even one death is enough', but of course you can't eliminate every last death. What's the stats on us vs. the rest of the world w.r.t. road deaths?

[Romeo]

<br/><br/>
<span style="background: rgb(170, 0, 0); padding: 20px; border-bottom: 5px solid rgb(140,0,0);">Lethality Comparison: Motorcycling versus Smoking</span>
<br/><br/>

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is seen in today's society as a bit of a bad habit, but nothing too serious. Hey, you're not hurting anyone right? Motorcycling on the other hand, well, you're a menace to society and an organ donor. Just a few rides away from certain death, better not ride two days in a row either, that's just asking for trouble. But wait, what is actually more dangerous?

The focus of this investigation is solely on fatalities. As injuries/sickness are not accounted for in the statistics I have available. It would be moot anyway, what's worse, a broken arm or pneumonia?



THE FACTS ABOUT MOTORCYCLING

In 2006 there were 110,684 registered <acronym title="87,723">motorcycles</acronym> and <acronym title="22,691">mopeds</acronym>[1]. In that year there were 42 <acronym title="It's my understanding that Mopeds are counted as motorcycles">motorcycle</acronym> <acronym title="Including 3 pillions">fatalities</acronym>[2]. Assuming one person owns one motorcycle or moped. I accept that this is not always the case, as some individuals will own many cycles - these figures would need to be included in the calculations once a sensible estimate for multiple cycle ownership is devised.

This equates to <acronym title="0.000379458639">0.000379</acronym>. Take a random group of 10,000 bikers and you would lose 3.79 every year.



HOW THIS COMPARES TO SMOKING


In 2006, 24 percent of New Zealanders aged 15–64 years were cigarette smokers (est. 1,088,594 people)[3]. "Smoking [causes] an estimated 4,700 deaths each year" [4] Many sources (mostly governmental) place the figure at 4,700. But this figure appears somewhat outdated, circa the late 1990's. The percentage of smokers appears to have dropped 3% since this time. I will use the conservative estimate of 4,000 per year in my calculations. Most fatalities are brought about through respiratory and cardiovascular diseases/cancers which are attributed to smoking[5]. Note: fatalities from passive smoking not included.

This equates to <acronym title="0.00367446449">0.00367</acronym>. Take a random group of 10,000 smokers and you would lose 36.7 every year.




CONCLUSION

If you partake in either activity for an entire lifetime, then you are roughly 10 times more likely to die prematurely from smoking than you are from motorcycling. Exposures can be debated, but leave that for another time. So why is there such a negative label placed on motorcycling by the greater society? Is it the swift horrific nature of motorcycle accidents versus the quiet, creeping diseases of smoking? The fact that motorcycling fatalities usually happen to younger people, and smoking fatalities happen to those who are older? The Media - when was the last time you saw a news story on someone who had just died from smoking? Or does the influence come partly from offshore, such as America, where the motorcycle fatality statistics are far more grim? I would like to know, because I have friends and family who are smokers, and yet they refuse to accept my decision to enter the world of motorcycling. Clearly any harm that came to me would greatly bereave them, but I feel exactly the same about their smoking. At first I found it hypocritical, but maybe it's ignorance more than anything. Ignorance on my part, aswell as theirs. Because if you take a step back you'll see that the overriding message is that there is risk in everything we do. Risk is what makes life worth living, and managing the risks is what makes life long.

ScumDog: "Ships are safe in the harbour - but that's not what ships are for...."






Interesting note: More pedestrians were killed in 2006 than motorcyclists, with 45 fatalities[2].

[1] Land Transport (Page 48) (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/statistics/motor-vehicle-registration/docs/2006.pdf)
[2] Land Transport (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/research/toll.html#fatal)
[3] Ministry of Social Development (http://www.socialreport.msd.govt.nz/health/cigarette-smoking.html)
[4] Ministry of Health (http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/wpg_index/About-smokefreelaw-faqs-rationale)
[5] Statistics New Zealand (http://www.stats.govt.nz/analytical-reports/monitoring-progress/living-stds-health/health.htm)


<acronym title="Intellectual Property">IP</acronym> property of <acronym title="Alexander">Romeo</acronym> - I am not a qualified statistician, so double check any figures BEFORE quoting them. All content referenced is the property of their respective owners. Evidently I feel strongly about this topic and wanted to draw my own conclusions based on the FACTS. Apologies if anyone is offended by any of my comments, this is not my intention.

[NZsarge]

Hmmm....I ride a bike....I smoke....and I'm waaayyy overweight so...I'm screwed!!:bye::killingme

[James Deuce]

Hmmm....I ride a bike....I smoke....and I'm waaayyy overweight so...I'm screwed!!:bye::killingme

Ride faster then!

[Usarka]

Interesting note: More pedestrians were killed in 2006 than motorcyclists, with 45 fatalities[/COLOR][COLOR="Gray"

No worries, the clampdown on speed will make it safer for pedestrians....

[NZsarge]

Ride faster then!

Deal..............

[James Deuce]

Nice new purchase btw - bet you make that thing look like a clown bike!

[AllanB]

Interesting note: More pedestrians were killed in 2006 than motorcyclists, with 45 fatalities[2].

I guess the Labour party have not seen this fact yet - otherwise pedestrians would be registered (costing $$$$$$) and wearing bum-plates. Got to make those people who are dying pay their dues first.

New for 2008 - a 'walking tax'?????

[MSTRS]

...I'm screwed!!

Not quite. You don't walk too, do you?

[sunhuntin]

I'm afraid the battle was lost many years ago... we are all effectively drones.

On another note, there are quite a lot of unregistered vehicles out there. I think that is a bigger problem.

i agree with that. ive often thought itd be great to have a cop stationed on every single petrol station forecourt. not only would it make life safer for the staff, but the number on unregistered/warrented vehicles that come in... not to mention the unrestrained kids the dole bludgers keep producing... fines would be being handed out left right and center.

[davereid]

Of course if our roads were wider, with adequate capacity for the number of vehicles on them and decent median barriers, the head-on would be a thing of the past.

Then gradually replace traffic lights with round-abouts to make fail-to-yield accidents non fatal.

But we can't blame road engineering because... well just because.

[The Stranger]

THE FACTS ABOUT MOTORCYCLING[/B]
[INDENT]In 2006 there were 110,684 registered <acronym title="87,723">motorcycles</acronym> and <acronym title="22,691">mopeds</acronym>[1]. In that year there were 42 <acronym title="It's my understanding that Mopeds are counted as motorcycles">motorcycle</acronym> <acronym title="Including 3 pillions">fatalities</acronym>[2]. Assuming one person owns one motorcycle or moped. I accept that this is not always the case, as some individuals will own many cycles - these figures would need to be included in the calculations once a sensible estimate for multiple cycle ownership is devised.


You raise some good points there.
Here (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=59500) was a rough attempt at quantifying multi bike ownership

[les king]

No worries, the clampdown on speed will make it safer for pedestrians....

and theres gonna be a shit load more of them around if helen and harry have their way

[Delphinus]

i agree with that. ive often thought itd be great to have a cop stationed on every single petrol station forecourt. not only would it make life safer for the staff, but the number on unregistered/warrented vehicles that come in... not to mention the unrestrained kids the dole bludgers keep producing... fines would be being handed out left right and center.

Thats actually a very valid point. Great way to catch all those type of vehicles. Even just to do a blitz occasionally. There is the possibility that the station with the cop might loose some revenue that day... would the manager mind Sunhuntin?

swbarnett, I couldn't agree more, its a dangerous world in many ways, if you're really worried that much then dont get in the car.
Guess the deaths are more visually horrific what with mangled cars and bodies and blood etc vs slowly coughing yourself to death in a hospital bed.

[sunhuntin]

Thats actually a very valid point. Great way to catch all those type of vehicles. Even just to do a blitz occasionally. There is the possibility that the station with the cop might loose some revenue that day... would the manager mind Sunhuntin?

swbarnett, I couldn't agree more, its a dangerous world in many ways, if you're really worried that much then dont get in the car.
Guess the deaths are more visually horrific what with mangled cars and bodies and blood etc vs slowly coughing yourself to death in a hospital bed.

if i could set it up, i wouldnt target one station. id have one cop at every single station this country has. everyone needs petrol eventually. and the number of cars that come in unroadworthy for whatever reason is disgusting.
would need, of course, thousands more cops, but could be good work for those who are halfway to being retired for whatever reason... would be basically security work with the ability to give tickets and arrest if needed.

my station gets cops in daily as customers. ive often noticed the more dodgy "likely to drive off type" customers have second thoughts when a red n blue pulls in.

[Delphinus]

if i could set it up, i wouldnt target one station. id have one cop at every single station this country has. everyone needs petrol eventually. and the number of cars that come in unroadworthy for whatever reason is disgusting.

It might be hard to get that done, due to like you say lack of staff available. But what if a few cops were stationed at random stations at random times. No car or undercover car.

[swbarnett]

Well, you're representing the figures in a slightly odd way, which my whiskey-addled brain might be misinterpreting, but I think there's better ways of saying those figures. The way you're writing them, if the number was `1', then that would mean there was one death for every registered vehicle. So you will never get large-looking figures like that.

A value of 1 would mean that the entire travelling public have only a year to live.
A value of 0.00015 means that the travelling public have a statistical life expectancy of 6,666 years. Not a bad wicket.

The only time I worry about any statistic is if it affects my own life expectancy or that of my circle of acquaintances. The road toll does not.


The more normal way of writing it would be to divide the number of registered vehicles by the number of deaths. Giving ~6619, which means that there was one death for every 6619 vehicles in New Zealand. Out of 2.7 million or so. Which doesn't sound quite so peachy.
Indeed you are right. I forgot that at 1 in the morning. Even so, 1 death per year per over 6000 vehicles is nothing to worry about. Put 6000 vehicles in close proximity and I'd lay odds that it would be impossible to run for long without averaging one death a year.


People always say `even one death is enough', but of course you can't eliminate every last death.
I would say that our current road toll is at the "every last death point".


What's the stats on us vs. the rest of the world w.r.t. road deaths?
I don't have the figures for anywhere else. From memory I think we are marginally higher than most. There are many reasons for this and I think comparing countries is fraught with difficulties (which is not to say that we can't learn anything from looking at others).

[sunhuntin]

It might be hard to get that done, due to like you say lack of staff available. But what if a few cops were stationed at random stations at random times. No car or undercover car.

that could work... i do think that while a station may loose a few sales due to having an onsite guard or cop, the returns would be bigger and better due to customers feeling safer all round.
or maybe have a second type of security guard, one with the power to arrest and issue fines, but doesnt hold the title of cop.
an undercover car could work, as it would be amongst staff cars, and most customers arent in often enough to know who drives what [even my daily customers dont realise that the motorbike is mine] so an unmarked car could hide quite nicely in full view.

[Delphinus]

that could work... i do think that while a station may loose a few sales due to having an onsite guard or cop, the returns would be bigger and better due to customers feeling safer all round.
And only the unreg/warrant'd people would have anything to worry about, and the only way to reduce sales would be if they were to talk to each other and say "Dont go to sunhuntin's BP/whatever" which I dont think is a likely hood.

I've heard on the radio sometimes of people warning of laser's being used in certain areas, but I dont think this will be a problem. Most law abiding drivers happily rego and warrant their vehicle. Its only the constant-drunk-drivers, disqualified, and "bums" who this would be targetting. Which IMO is more of a danger/risk (at any speed) than someone alert and travelling at 111km/h

[Coldrider]

If the death toll by motor accidents is reduced, the death rate by all other causes increases.

[Delphinus]

Also, this technique isn't even slowing people down. Some people moan about being stopped while driving along within the law, but in this case they are already stopped and out of the car, quick check in the window of warrant/rego, glance at license, and you're on your way.

[sunhuntin]

Also, this technique isn't even slowing people down. Some people moan about being stopped while driving along within the law, but in this case they are already stopped and out of the car, quick check in the window of warrant/rego, glance at license, and you're on your way.

exactly... ive spotted at least 2 unregoed vehicles in my 2 years, and seen many more with unrestrained kids. 2 out of date cars may not seem like many, but keep in mind i work an average of 26 hrs a week... so how many come in that i dont see? both vehicles were several years out. one looked like it was headed to the scrap yard, and the other i think was a housebus going to be restored.

[Ocean1]

exactly... ive spotted at least 2 unregoed vehicles in my 2 years, and seen many more with unrestrained kids. 2 out of date cars may not seem like many, but keep in mind i work an average of 26 hrs a week... so how many come in that i dont see? both vehicles were several years out. one looked like it was headed to the scrap yard, and the other i think was a housebus going to be restored.

I suspect you've not been looking very hard.
One per year isn't an issue worth worrying about, I seem to recall hearing that some 4% of vehicles passing any given checkpoint are on the road illegally. It's an easy problem to solve, issue registrations with embedded ID chips, install readers on all pumps. Done. The cost is even reasonably low.

Generally though, I'm agin' the creeping growth in rules. I druther ditch WOF's altogether and pay a higher tax on fuel to cover ACC. Simple is good.

[Delphinus]

I druther ditch WOF's altogether and pay a higher tax on fuel to cover ACC. Simple is good.
But how do you keen vehicles in some semblance of good mechanical repair?

Edit: or do you mean rego?

[sunhuntin]

yeh... i cant read every rego/wof... too busy with everything else. i notice the kids more because they are right where im putting the petrol in. if the petrol went in towards the front, then id likely notice rego/wof more often. only reason i noticed the two i did was cos they were both in crap condition. the ute didnt even have a rod to hold the bonnet up... so i made the owner hold it, lol.

just an aside, hydralic bonnet rods are not part of the wof... any idea why? i damn near had one slam on my head one time... stepped out to show the owner her dipstick, and SLAM! if id been underneath, i would have likely been burned and had a headache. now i test em and make the owners hold if they seem dicky.

[Pancakes]

Good thread SWB,

I disagree that it's not important cos each of those 1's is a person with a family. They also cost lots to investigate, clean up and the families have time off work etc. For each death there must be at least one other who was hospitalised or may not work again for some time too.

The point about trying to eliminate the very last numbers in a world with us crazy humans all over it is very valid tho.

+1 one for opening up an interesting topic.

[xwhatsit]

But how do you keen vehicles in some semblance of good mechanical repair?

Queensland has no WoF system whatsoever. People aren't falling out of cars and running off the road.

I think he does mean rego, though.

[Ocean1]

But how do you keen vehicles in some semblance of good mechanical repair?

Edit: or do you mean rego?

Those countries that don't have WOF systems tend to find it makes little difference to the quality of the fleet's service. I know the cops in W Aust (for eg) do occasional spot-checks on the more obvious things like tread depth though.

[P38]

that could work... i do think that while a station may loose a few sales due to having an onsite guard or cop, the returns would be bigger and better due to customers feeling safer all round.
or maybe have a second type of security guard, one with the power to arrest and issue fines, but doesnt hold the title of cop.
an undercover car could work, as it would be amongst staff cars, and most customers arent in often enough to know who drives what [even my daily customers dont realise that the motorbike is mine] so an unmarked car could hide quite nicely in full view.

I strongly agree with this sentiment.

Why should owners of unregistered vehicles use our Roading and ACC systems for free.

Isn't that Thieft?

If you cant buy alcohol unless you can prove your 18 years old then it follows that you should not be allowed to buy Fuel unless you can prove you have current registration for the vehicle you are attempting to fill.

As registration is only avalible if you first have a current warrant then you can be sure owners of unwarranted and unregistered vehicles will find it difficult to obtain fuel for these vehicles.

Registration certificates are already bar coded so it's a simple matter of your swipping your registration card. Scanning cameras can read the number plate of the vehicle and cross check it with the swiped registration to maintain a high level of integrity and unlock the pump before the fuel is delivered to said vehicle.

That way you don't need to pay police or security.

All service stations will be equally affected so no one will be dissadvantaged.

This should take care of the majority of unregistered/unwarrented vehicles on our roads.

However there will always be those who attempt to cheat.

Cops can mop up whats left with spot inspections as per usual.

Two guess what the Namby Pamby bleeding heart PC liberals will think of this though.

Despite what John Kirwan says, Kiwis need to harden up and stop taking shit, cos we are becoming a nation of Soft Cocks!

[cooneyr]

..............Lethality Comparison: Motorcycling versus Smoking</span>[/CENTER]
<br/><br/>...........
..............Is it the swift horrific nature of motorcycle accidents versus the quiet, creeping diseases of smoking?...........

Interesting points and you are right about the "appearance" of the deaths. Acute (motorcycle) vs Chronic (smoking). The last paper I did at uni was a Risk Management Paper and there was some really interesting examples of how people dont even bat an eyelid about chronic conditions i.e. chemical dumps slowly leaking causing cancer and acute conditions such as nuclear power plants as a neighbour. Most would rather live next to the chemical dump even though the rate of deaths could be many times higher.


Of course if our roads were wider, with adequate capacity for the number of vehicles on them and decent median barriers, the head-on would be a thing of the past.

Then gradually replace traffic lights with round-abouts to make fail-to-yield accidents non fatal.

But we can't blame road engineering because... well just because.

You obviously dont know very much about engineering
a - wider roads = higher speeds (ever noticed how everybody unconsciously speeds up on passing lanes)
b - roundabouts only work where the traffic flows from all approached are relatively similar. If you have a highly tidal flows i.e. most traffic from one or two approaches roundabouts have very high delays compared to signals and they are not much safer - they just change the severity and type of crashes.

There are three aspects to road safety - the three E's Engineering, Education and Enforcement. I'm and engineer so kinda bias but engineering out all the hazards which in a extreme case means dead straight roads with robots driving would be damn boring. If you look at the crash reports (I've looked at a "few" now) many of them are driver not paying attention, alcohol, etc etc which there is no way you can engineer out (from a road design perspective). Lastly there is the enforcement side of things which picks up the people intentionally driving stupidly.

The engineering side of things has been hammered to death over the past 15 years - there are very few proper black spots left, most are grey spots. Education has had a pretty good push over the past 10sih years. Enforcement is ongoing but I personally think it is time to head towards targeting dangerous driving rather than speeding etc. Problem is that prosecuting dangerous driving is much harder than speeding. This is because dangerous driving is not measurable rather it is discression based.

Cheers R

P.S. Just seen P38's signature - maybe I should have kept my mouth shut!

[sunhuntin]

thats a good idea... maybe have something on the license, like a chip, and scan that. people forget the essential stuff as it is without adding more things to remember. ive had so many have to run back to their cars to get their eftpos card or whatever.

[Ixion]

Oh, yes. And we could extend this further. You should have to swipe your licence too. Then the system can cross match your licence info with the rego info. And if your licence doesn't cover the vehicle you're filling, no fuel. And the camera photographing the plates could also check for an L plate. L licence, no L plate no fuel.

But what about diesels who haven't paid their RUC? Can't have them getting away with anything. Have to be some way for the system to read the vehicle mileage. And scan the RUC sticker thing.

But what if someone takes the rego sticker AND plates from a registered vehicel and puts them on an unregistered one. Horrors! They might get fuel ! So we need to extend the system a bit, and have it read the VIN of the vehicle. Still got a problem though , cos we don't know if the licence the driver is presenting (see above) is actually his. What we need is for all drivers to , by law, have a microchip implanted in the foreheads. And special little helmets at the pumps that you put on, so it can read the micro chip.

FFS. Have you people nothing better to do than whine and bitch about some unknown dude whose rego has lapsed. Get a life, the Warewhare will have them on special on Boxing Day.

[SPman]

An old person I knew had a massive heart attack at the wheel, the car slowed but nudged a lamp post as it stopped.
Her death was recorded as a road fatality!!!!

[Delphinus]

FFS. Have you people nothing better to do than whine and bitch about some unknown dude whose rego has lapsed. Get a life, the Warewhare will have them on special on Boxing Day.

Some things are over the top, but in this case we're just trying to discuss alternative methods to reduce road fatalities than the good ol' "Speed = DEATH!"

I just filled up the cage 10mins ago, and asked the attendant how many unwarranted/rego'd car's he'd noticed in the last month.. At least a dozen he said, thought a cop checking cars in stations was a great idea. "Would catch all the other things going on" he said, "Drunk driving, drug deals etc. Had a guy come in here reeking of alcohol, asked him if he was driving... 'Mind your own business' he replied, so I was straight on the phone to the cops"

[Ixion]

How on earth does whether a vehicle is registered or not affect the 'road toll' ? Maybe the system should also check whether anyone buying fuel has paid their income tax ?

[Delphinus]

How on earth does whether a vehicle is registered or not affect the 'road toll' ?
No rego often means no warrant. no warrant means either:
Vehicle is not roadworthy, brakes, tyres etc are faulty.
You dont care, does this mean you are disqualified? More likely to drive drunk?

[Ixion]

What nonsense. Are you seriously claiming that someone who has neglected to renew their rego is thereby evidenced as a drunken disqualified driver driving an unroadworthy vehicle ? Would you care to extend it further and show that they are also paedophiles , dope smugglers and bite the heads off fluffy pink kittens?

A lack of a rego label means either that the vehicle's owner has neglected to renew it (because they forgot; haven't had time; have renewed and the new label is in the post; can't afford it until pay day; whatever) ; or the vehicle is indeed registered but the new label is not displayed . Or maybe someone pinched the label (happened to me twice now).

Much the same goes for WoF. It may mean that there is something about the vehicle that would fail a warrent . Which may, or may not, have a bearing on roadworthiness (pipes too loud doesn't affect road safety for instance. Ditto emission stuff). Or , it may equally well be that the vehicle is completely roadworthy and the owner just hasn't jumped through the necessary bureaucratic hoops.

[The Pastor]

Oh, yes. And we could extend this further. You should have to swipe your licence too. Then the system can cross match your licence info with the rego info. And if your licence doesn't cover the vehicle you're filling, no fuel. And the camera photographing the plates could also check for an L plate. L licence, no L plate no fuel.

But what about diesels who haven't paid their RTC? Can't have them getting away with anything. Have to be some way for the system to read the vehicle mileage. And scan the RTC sticker thing.

But what if someone takes the rego sticker AND plates from a registered vehicel and puts them on an unregistered one. Horrors! They might get fuel ! So we need to extend the system a bit, and have it read the VIN of the vehicle. Still got a problem though , cos we don't know if the licence the driver is presenting (see above) is actually his. What we need is for all drivers to , by law, have a microchip implanted in the foreheads. And special little helmets at the pumps that you put on, so it can read the micro chip.

FFS. Have you people nothing better to do than whine and bitch about some unknown dude whose rego has lapsed. Get a life, the Warewhare will have them on special on Boxing Day.
also, it would cross check if you have unpaid fines, and wont let you get gas until you pay your fine ;)

[sunhuntin]

What nonsense. Are you seriously claiming that someone who has neglected to renew their rego is thereby evidenced as a drunken disqualified driver driving an unroadworthy vehicle ? Would you care to extend it further and show that they are also paedophiles , dope smugglers and bite the heads off fluffy pink kittens?

A lack of a rego label means either that the vehicle's owner has neglected to renew it (because they forgot; haven't had time; have renewed and the new label is in the post; can't afford it until pay day; whatever) ; or the vehicle is indeed registered but the new label is not displayed . Or maybe someone pinched the label (happened to me twice now).

Much the same goes for WoF. It may mean that there is something about the vehicle that would fail a warrent . Which may, or may not, have a bearing on roadworthiness (pipes too loud doesn't affect road safety for instance. Ditto emission stuff). Or , it may equally well be that the vehicle is completely roadworthy and the owner just hasn't jumped through the necessary bureaucratic hoops.

with rego/warrent, its "ok" for it to lapse for several days [ie, expires christmas day, but you cant get it done due to going away] but several YEARS without a current rego [i cant read wof stickers when on the fly, but stands to reason if one is out, so is the other] usually means theres something badly wrong with the car, owner cant afford to repair, so just doesnt get a wof cos they know the car would fail.

delph... you make a good point about drunk drivers. i dont *think* ive encountered any... drunk passengers yes, but not any drunk drivers that i know of. id actually forgot about that side of things.

[Ixion]

Doesn't stand to reason that no rego means no WoF and vice versa. They don't necessarily coincide. And if someone has been driving around for several years displaying an expired WoF and rego, then it would seem that they must be pretty careful and law abiding drivers, since they have presumably not been stopped by the cops for anything in that time.

[Delphinus]

Are you seriously claiming that someone who has neglected to renew their rego is thereby evidenced as a drunken disqualified driver driving an unroadworthy vehicle ?

Not at all, I was hoping my post wouldn't come across that way but it must have.

What I meant to say is they are possibly more likely.... This is a discussion right? Is just an idea :)

[davereid]

a - wider roads = higher speeds (ever noticed how everybody unconsciously speeds up on passing lanes)

Yep agree. Higher speeds on well designed roads are fine. They just get you to your destination faster.


b - roundabouts only work where the traffic flows from all approached are relatively similar. If you have a highly tidal flows i.e. most traffic from one or two approaches roundabouts have very high delays compared to signals and they are not much safer - they just change the severity and type of crashes.

Thats what I said... my comment was that roundabouts work to make fail-to-yield accidents less severe.

Your comment about tidal flows is correct if you simply replace an existing intersection with a roundabout.

But done properly, a busy intersection would utilise overpasses and underpasses to ensure only diverting or converging traffic ever need reach a yield point. The majority of tidal flow traffic would just pass through.


The engineering side of things has been hammered to death over the past 15 years - there are very few proper black spots left, most are grey spots.

I don't agree. We may have done work on blackspots. But for the most part, our roads are third world standard.

Roads like State Highway 1/2 from Wellington to Kapiti are just a joke.

They have been engineered to be safer by sticking in cheese cutters and dropping the speed limit. They actually should be rebuilt, with 3 lanes in each direction, separated by proper barriers.

In all seriousness, Transit have underperformed, and should all be fired. We have a bloody census every 5 years, yet Transit bleat that they couldn't anticipate demand here or there.

Fixing rust in a fucked old car is not engineering. Its bogging and painting, it won't fix the car.

And thats how we fix New Zealands roads - with bog, paint and signs.

[P38]

Oh, yes. And we could extend this further. You should have to swipe your licence too. Then the system can cross match your licence info with the rego info. And if your licence doesn't cover the vehicle you're filling, no fuel. And the camera photographing the plates could also check for an L plate. L licence, no L plate no fuel.

But what about diesels who haven't paid their RUC? Can't have them getting away with anything. Have to be some way for the system to read the vehicle mileage. And scan the RUC sticker thing.

But what if someone takes the rego sticker AND plates from a registered vehicel and puts them on an unregistered one. Horrors! They might get fuel ! So we need to extend the system a bit, and have it read the VIN of the vehicle. Still got a problem though , cos we don't know if the licence the driver is presenting (see above) is actually his. What we need is for all drivers to , by law, have a microchip implanted in the foreheads. And special little helmets at the pumps that you put on, so it can read the micro chip.

FFS. Have you people nothing better to do than whine and bitch about some unknown dude whose rego has lapsed. Get a life, the Warewhare will have them on special on Boxing Day.

Yep

All these systems have already been developed.

RFID (Radio Frequency Identfication) embedded in the Licence, Registration and in the Vehicle would take care of all of the above without the need for the little helmet thingy.

Biometric identifcation coupled with RFID could make it very workable

It's all kinda BIG BROTHERISH but avalible today.

[P38]

How on earth does whether a vehicle is registered or not affect the 'road toll' ? Maybe the system should also check whether anyone buying fuel has paid their income tax ?

Yep

Thats easily do-able already too.:yes:

Scary huh!

[homer]

I dont even have to read this post to make a point

We have the highest number vehicles on the road per head count

Go do the maths

[RDJ]

Interesting note: More pedestrians were killed in 2006 than motorcyclists, with 45 fatalities[2].

I wonder if at any given time there are more or fewer pedestrians on the road than there are motorcyclists on the road?

[Katman]

Even so, 1 death per year per over 6000 vehicles is nothing to worry about.



And if that 1 death was your partner, or your son, or your sister, or your father - then you would have no problem with that?

[Delphinus]

And if that 1 death was your partner, or your son, or your sister, or your father - then you would have no problem with that?

Its a fact of life. Moving at 27.78meters per second (100km/h) with a whole lot of others moving at that speed some coming towards - closing at 55.56m/s. Some of them retards (and i'm not talking about speeding) you cant expect none of them to die.

[Katman]

Its a fact of life. Moving at 27.78meters per second (100km/h) with a whole lot of others moving at that speed some coming towards - closing at 55.56m/s. Some of them retards (and i'm not talking about speeding) you cant expect none of them to die.

What if their death was avoidable?

[Delphinus]

What if their death was avoidable?
Define avoidable?
If the speed limit was 10km/h it would be avoided.
If no-one drove drunk it would be avoided.
If all the lanes have concrete barriers between them it would be avoided.
If they didn't drive at all it would be avoided.

Where do you draw the line? The current laws draw the line in a position I do not agree with.

[Katman]

What if their death was avoidable?

And by that I mean, if your partner, or son, or sister, or father was killed in a vehicle accident that was completely avoidable, you'd be quite cool with that?

[homer]

And if that 1 death was your partner, or your son, or your sister, or your father - then you would have no problem with that?

Oh come on .....your going to go down the road of ....IF

were all fucked then arnt we
just get the fuck on with life


Its people like you that give us compulsorie ....fucken stuff

as many people die driving as they do drowning as they do smoking

:Oi:

[homer]

What if their death was avoidable?

Oh yeah and will you live if you say have a head on at 50 km
thats 2 cars or bikes
thats 100km crash
will you live at 100 km


maybe

[Katman]

Oh come on .....your going to go down the road of ....IF

were all fucked then arnt we
just get the fuck on with life


Its people like you that give us compulsorie ....fucken stuff

as many people die driving as they do drowning as they do smoking

:Oi:

Ok homer, what if it was your partner, or son, or sister, or father that was that 1 death in 6000. You'd be cool with that?

[swbarnett]

what if it was your partner, or son, or sister, or father that was that 1 death in 6000. You'd be cool with that?
No, I would not be "cool" with that. However, I would also not be "cool" with their freedoms having been removed for no good reason. If you loose a loved one the one comfort you have is that their life was full and, on the whole, enjoyable. If driving was their passion you'd hope that they were allowed to indulge that passion. I'd rather be dead (or lose someone) than have a government tell us we can't partake of our passion because there's a 1 in 6000 chance that one of us might cark it in any given year.

I'd rather have 1 day of freedom than a lifetime of slavery.

BTW: The probability of death on the road in NZ on any given day is approximately 1 in 2,340,855. I like those odds.

[davereid]

Yep, the law of diminishing returns has already kicked in.

We can pass lots more rules, viciously enforce them and spend millions on roading upgrades and driver education.

But someone will always make a mistake. Fail to see the red light. Do a U-turn on a blind corner. Turn right without seeing a pair of 100watt motorcycle headlights.

What law do we pass to fix that ?

[candor]

BTW: The probability of death on the road in NZ on any given day is approximately 1 in 2,340,855. I like those odds.

Or another way to see it is that its about one in 50 chance you'll die on the road given a lifetime of riding! Quik calc from - 400 killed out 20 000 yearly deaths from a 4 million pop yearly, x number of years likely on road.

These odds become less acceptable when we don't self reference but instead apply them to our family members. To me it's not kosha that Kiwis have double the odds of a gorey death by others hands than people living in UK, Norway, much higher than even Oz... in fact many places :gob:. I object.

Even worse - in 1990 our odds were similar to theirs (only 30% higher toll per capita then). No diminishing returns, Just slackness at high levels. Our toll would be down nearer 150 by 2010 had the Govt changed the draft transport policy per experts recommendations given to them 7 years ago. This was discussed with Cullen but he baulked.

Back On topic. Agreed - that disqualifying speeders is a tad silly as it'll do stuff all to reduce the toll.

[swbarnett]

Or another way to see it is that its about one in 50 chance you'll die on the road given a lifetime of riding! Quik calc from - 400 killed out 20 000 yearly deaths from a 4 million pop yearly, x number of years likely on road.
To me a 2% chance of dying in a vehicle accident over my lifetime doesn't sound too bad. You've got to die of something.


These odds become less acceptable when we don't self reference but instead apply them to our family members.
Part of the problem we have is that the issue is looked at with too much emotion. The result of which is the "don't let Johny climb the tree or he'll fall" attitude.


To me it's not kosha that Kiwis have double the odds of a gorey death by others hands than people living in UK, Norway, much higher than even Oz... in fact many places :gob:. I object.
One problem with comparing us with other developed countries is that their population density is much higher. The length of road per capita is high in NZ and therefore we don't have as much money to throw at them.


Even worse - in 1990 our odds were similar to theirs (only 30% higher toll per capita then). No diminishing returns, Just slackness at high levels. Our toll would be down nearer 150 by 2010 had the Govt changed the draft transport policy per experts recommendations given to them 7 years ago. This was discussed with Cullen but he baulked.
Do you have details? It would be nice if it was possible to reduce the road toll without unduly draconion measures. I still maintain however that our road toll does not warrant the attention it gets in the public eye.

[grusomhat]

All you people discussing restricting fuel purchases. As much of a good idea it is it just wouldn't work very well.

Not everyone that comes into petrol stations are buying petrol for their cars. What about people filling containers for lawn mowers, bikes and what not?

Also the people who wouldn't be able to purchase it would be more inclined to go steal it out of their next door neighbors minivan.

Could probably work though with a few adjustments. I'm 'bout to go to work at BP. I'll see how many unrego'd vehicles I see.

[Swoop]

All you people discussing restricting fuel purchases.

Not everyone that comes into petrol stations are buying petrol for their cars. What about people filling containers for lawn mowers, bikes and what not?
Boats are another prime example...
Their "road tax" is paid for in the fuel that goes into the cage's tank!
Unfair = Yes!

[Delphinus]

I'm 'bout to go to work at BP. I'll see how many unrego'd vehicles I see.

Please keep us posted :)

[grusomhat]

Please keep us posted :)
Well I was only there for 2 hours today and it was sooo slow. Probably like 10 cars the whole time. I'm there for 8 hours tomorrow so I'll check again then.

[Grahameeboy]

And by that I mean, if your partner, or son, or sister, or father was killed in a vehicle accident that was completely avoidable, you'd be quite cool with that?

Reality is that any accident is not completly unavoidable and death is part of life.

Sometimes we spend more time working out how, why etc than we do grieving.

[The Stranger]

One problem with comparing us with other developed countries is that their population density is much higher. The length of road per capita is high in NZ and therefore we don't have as much money to throw at them.


Another one is that the vehicle safety standards. We coincidentally lag the rest of the world here too.
For example we were told how bad we all were for killing ourselves and that we would have to slow down, but the govt didn't require side intrusion beams in cars (if memory serves correct they still don't) so the auto manufacturers omitted them for our market.
Yet another issue when comparing countries is, perhaps if the govt were more serious in shouldering some responsibility, as they do in other countries, instead of trying to push it all on to the drivers. The govt sticks it's head in the sand and shouts slow down.

[Katman]

Reality is that any accident is not completly unavoidable and death is part of life.

Sometimes we spend more time working out how, why etc than we do grieving.

I'm not talking about grieving after the event - I'm talking about avoiding the need to grieve in the first place. Of course people die in accidents and we can't ever expect a zero road toll, but to suggest "there is nothing wrong with our road toll" is bizarre in the extreme.

[homer]

Ok homer, what if it was your partner, or son, or sister, or father that was that 1 death in 6000. You'd be cool with that?

Hey close the curtains and stay indoors

[DEATH_INC.]

Then gradually replace traffic lights with round-abouts to make fail-to-yield accidents non fatal.
Bwa ha ha ha!!!!!
or in good ol' NZ you could replace all the roundabouts with lights and just issue speeding tickets....

[DEATH_INC.]

with rego/warrent, its "ok" for it to lapse for several days [ie, expires christmas day, but you cant get it done due to going away] but several YEARS without a current rego [i cant read wof stickers when on the fly, but stands to reason if one is out, so is the other] usually means theres something badly wrong with the car, owner cant afford to repair, so just doesnt get a wof cos they know the car would fail.
Maybe it means someone can't afford to register 3 farkin vehicles that you can't drive all at once on the road.....

[Sanx]

Bwa ha ha ha!!!!!
or in good ol' NZ you could replace all the roundabouts with lights and just issue speeding tickets....

Yes. More traffic lights are the answer to all NZ's road toll troubles. On a recent pootle into the Auckland city centre I timed the amount of time I spent waiting at red lights (was on the bike, so was filtering to the front each time) and the amount of time I spent actually moving. 12 minutes to get from Upper Queen St to Customs St. Ten minutes ten seconds spent at red lights. One minute 50 seconds spent moving. It took as long to get from my house in Mt Roskill to Upper Queen St as it did to go the rest of the way.

Traffic lights are an abomination and should be gas-axed on sight.

[McJim]

What if their death was avoidable?

All accidents are avoidable - look at your conception for instance...or the chances you would appear on this forum...these are accidents that many of us regret and yet what could we have done about them? Nothing. All that remains is to put you on ignore and leave it at that. Shame really. :(

[candor]

Part of the problem we have is that the issue is looked at with too much emotion. The result of which is the "don't let Johny climb the tree or he'll fall" attitude.

Do you have details? It would be nice if it was possible to reduce the road toll without unduly draconion measures. I still maintain however that our road toll does not warrant the attention it gets in the public eye.

Whats wrong with emotion about a 3 billion dollar drain. Its costing double the % of our gross domestic product of civilised countries in emergency service, lost earnings, welfare dependency, rehab, write offs etc etc than it does in some similar economies with similar geography and density.

Detaile re us falling behind when once we were on a par - see IRTAD database and the historic data in Motor vehicles crashes in NZ (M.O.T. web). Or did you mean details re how to reduce toll to 150 by 2010? Oops I meant reduce it by 150 ie to 300 (the official goal) by 2010.

Here - https://www.aa.co.nz/motoring/media/Section?Action=View&Section_id=53&Story_id=1043&Layout=Printer

Govt has just put this goal back to 2040 dealine. In other words plans complete inactivity on the subject apart from raising regos and gas so high that only Imperial BMW wielding State employees can contemplate wheels.

I agree it doesn't warrant the public attention it gets, but not because its not important - more because the fat juicy contracts ad agencies get produce no net impact on the toll (Duignan report for MOT 2007). Total scam and the Govt knows this, but the gravy train rolls on. Mainly the ads justify driving taxes in peoples minds, so they're seen as being worth it.

Called "engineering consent" it is. Starting to see this happening with Govt friendly media now putting out stories slanted to show how well the smacking law is supposedly working.

Also our media has to navel gaze a bit because not too much happens here of note. Road Safety like politician clowns provides easy stock formula copy:niceone:.

[Ocean1]

With regards to engineered solutions this says it all really:


Currently motorists pay 53 cents in tax for every litre of petrol they buy, with only 13 cents going on roading.

I wonder what percentage of GDP we spend per kilometer traveled compared to other comparable countries. I also wonder how that figure has changed historically.


Its costing double the % of our gross domestic product of civilised countries in emergency service, lost earnings, welfare dependency, rehab, write offs etc etc than it does in some similar economies with similar geography and density.

No statistical proof at all, but I suspect any comparative deterioration in our accident rates may well have at least some correlation with the introduction of ACC. In any rational insurance market the price of the cover is closely linked to the risk of the insured party. Here it’s not, high risk combinations of vehicles and drivers pay a pittance compared to the true cost of their driving activities. Overseas a young driver with a poor record attempting to purchase a high performance vehicle would find that not only would the insurance cost be unaffordable, the whole deal would be simply impossible. No insurance = no purchase.

Unfair? Hell no, the real world does impose penalties for unsafe behaviour, a lesson we go to great lengths to avoid teaching our kids. Even a group considered to be low risk would find that the purchase price of a Porsche 911 or a GSXR1300 was only the beginning of the cost of owning one. Bin either once or twice and you might well find yourself uninsurable, and therefore ineligible to drive it. These are the real-world costs of the higher-end risk groups. Who’s paying them here?

[Bren]

Worldwide Death Rates...2004

<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45">
</td> <td width="44">
OECD Pos'n

^a
</td> <td width="94">
Per Capita Death Rate (2004) ^b
</td> <td width="175">

Country
^c
</td> <td width="101">
Number of Deaths, 2004
</td> <td align="center" valign="top" width="105"> Trend in Number of Deaths
</td> <td width="115">
Population (millions)
^d
</td> <td width="98">
VMT/VKmT Rate (2003)
^e
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45"> 3
</td> <td width="44"> 2
</td> <td width="94"> 5.33
</td> <td width="175"> Sweden
</td> <td width="101"> 480 ^f
</td> <td width="105"> - 9.3% ^f
</td> <td align="left" width="115"> 9.0
</td> <td align="left" width="98"> 8.3
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45"> 4
</td> <td width="44"> 3
</td> <td width="94"> 5.34
</td> <td width="175"> United Kingdom
</td> <td align="left" width="101"> 3,221 ^h
</td> <td align="left" width="105"> - 7.9% ^f
</td> <td align="left" width="115"> 60.3
</td> <td align="left" width="98"> 7.5
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45"> 6
</td> <td width="44"> 5
</td> <td width="94"> 5.76
</td> <td width="175"> Japan
</td> <td width="101"> 7,358 ^l
</td> <td width="105"> - 17.11%
</td> <td align="left" width="115"> 127.7
</td> <td align="left" width="98"> 11.2
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45">13
</td> <td width="44"> 12
</td> <td width="94"> 7.94
</td> <td width="175"> Australia
</td> <td align="left" width="101"> 1,596 ⁱ
</td> <td align="left" width="105"> - 1.5% ⁱ
</td> <td align="left" width="115"> 20.1
</td> <td align="left" width="98"> 8.0
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45">20
</td> <td width="44"> 15
</td> <td width="94"> 10.74
</td> <td width="175"> New Zealand
</td> <td width="101"> 436 ^j
</td> <td width="105"> - 5.0%
</td> <td align="left" width="115"> 4.06
</td> <td align="left" width="98"> 12.4
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45">40
</td> <td width="44"> 27
</td> <td width="94"> 14.53
</td> <td width="175"> USA (http://www.driveandstayalive.com/info%20section/statistics/stats-usa.htm)
</td> <td width="101"> 42,636 ^m
</td> <td width="105"> - 0.58%
</td> <td align="left" width="115"> 293.5
</td> <td align="left" width="98"> 9.4 ^m
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table bgcolor="#ffffcc" border="1" width="720"><tbody><tr><td width="45">50
</td> <td width="44"> --
</td> <td width="94"> 24.01
</td> <td width="175"> Russian Federation
</td> <td align="left" width="101"> 34,506 ^f
</td> <td align="left" width="105"> - 3.1% ^f
</td> <td align="left" width="115"> 143.7
</td> <td align="left" width="98">
</td></tr></tbody></table>

This is only part of the table.
Find complete table here (http://www.driveandstayalive.com/info%20section/statistics/stats-multicountry-percapita-2004.htm)

[Ocean1]

Worldwide Death Rates...2004

Veeery inneresting.

And I see that NZ has the highest improvement in fatality rates in the years 1988 - 2001. And the third best performance in 1992 - 2001.

A relatively high rate per kilometre traveled compared to similar countries, but I suspect that's at least partly attributable to geographic conditions. Australia likely has the most similar cultural, economic, ethnic and vehicle class categories, but they probably tend to spend more high speed kilometers on bits of desert, rather than the seriously bent and narrow roads here...

[Bren]

Glad I dont drive/ride in Russia

[swbarnett]

1. Our road toll is not as bad as the media would have us believe (If we can reduce it all the better but we have bigger problems in NZ).

2. We are not as good as some countries but better than others (As of 2002 we were about the middle of the list of countries on http://www.driveandstayalive.com/info%20section/statistics/multi-country_death-rates_1988-2001.htm on a per capita basis)

3. There may be ways to reduce the road toll that do not involve penalising the innocent but ...

4. The government has no interest in reducing the road toll; only lining it's own coffers and staying in power.

5. Punitive actions towards drivers have little or no effect on the road toll.

6. TV advertising has no effect other than to convince the general public that driving is more dangerous than it really is.

And, most important of all:

7. Our freedom is being eroded for no good reason!

[candor]

You might like to think again... if the view is broadened beyond fatalities we are going backward like NO OTHER country. The road toll is indeed a growth industry.

Hospitalisations rose 25% since 2000.

In 2006 we’d climbed to being in the top 3 of 29 IRTAD countries for killing kids under 15 on roads per 1000 head. We're 3rd for killing 15-24 year olds, showing our graduated license system has been a loser.

Between 2000 - 2006 fatal or serious injury causing crash numbers steadily rose each year from 2152 to 2485.

Total injury causing crashes rose from 7830 to 10943. Hospitalisations rose from 5986 (2000) to 7427 (2006).

The goal for hospitalisations by 2010 which would bring us in line with best countries, but only at the year 2000 is 4500. LOLOLOLOL

Between 2001-2006 Accident Compensation motor vehicle crash new claim rose near 30% & costs from 53.9 to 75.7 million.

Checkpoints - big increase in these has put more people "in conflict with the law" so chase related deaths and injuries tripled in recent years (average of 39 persons affected now yearly).

In 2000 road crashes incurred a 3 billion social cost, Government’s 2010 target set then was a little over 2.15 billion, but by 2006 it had risen to 3.5 billion. Target was set scientifically se we'd equal the best countries a decade earlier (be like the UK was in 2000 by 2010). The continuing bungling is not good fiscal management.

Fatalities not down due to reduced crashes - crashes up - life changing injuries up. Head injuries and spinal are the bulk of the road toll and ought not be forgotten. Sensible countries in tallying harm count KSI' (killer and serious injury crashes) and aim to reduce the total numbers.

http://nz-road-safety-2010-dismal-failure.com/risk_targetting.htm
Quotas for seatbelt, alcohol and speed infractions arent exactly working - + there is no plan of action once they catch prats.

The white rose campaign and BADD are on track I reckon.

http://www.safe-nz.org.nz/crossroads/index.html

If the star 555 campaign gets off the ground NZ Police may be forced to allot more time to loose patrols trouble shooting "visible violations" and get off this cabbage patch cop number of speeder stalking, and this and this lets tax light drinkers with a limit drop at ever increasing checkpoints buzz.

I find it strange that such a totalitarian Govt as we have is not flat out road building. All fascist dictators build great and safe roads - look at Germany and Iraq! If they only did that we could become less of a Police enforcement state. Checkpoints are more about crim fishing nets than rd safety imo.

Many countries with minimal tolls don't have them.

As others have stated - if they were really interested in speed solutions exist.
The logic of trying to control the toll with primarily enforcement is like putting 100 life guards on a shark ridden beach. Not smart but its what we get. Can we make a silk purse from a sows ear?

[Pixie]

The road toll is a lot of shit.
it gives the media something to focus on
it give the politicians something to appear to be improving
it gives the cops something to raise revenue over.
The average drip is indoctrinated to believe it is an important issue.

Annette King - now minister of transport says the toll is too high at 400 odd.
Annette King - when the bitch was minister of health,said testing for prostate cancer was unimportant as it was better that men did not find out about their potential conditions - 600 deaths from prostate cancer a year is no big deal.

[Pixie]

exactly... ive spotted at least 2 unregoed vehicles in my 2 years, and seen many more with unrestrained kids. 2 out of date cars may not seem like many, but keep in mind i work an average of 26 hrs a week... so how many come in that i dont see? both vehicles were several years out. one looked like it was headed to the scrap yard, and the other i think was a housebus going to be restored.

Not having at rego is not obeying the rules! Oooooh!
I'm not sure anyone has died of it.
I've seen testing stations miss obviously dangerous faults and issue wof's

[Pixie]

Queensland has no WoF system whatsoever. People aren't falling out of cars and running off the road.

I think he does mean rego, though.

This is common. Wof's don't exists in most parts of the US.
The cops will issue defects for dead headlights/tail lights,check tyres at the same time.
When was the last time a stupid NZ cop looked at the WOF sticker at a checkpoint and actually looked to see if the tyres were ok?

[swbarnett]

Between 2000 - 2006 fatal or serious injury causing crash numbers steadily rose each year from 2152 to 2485.
While I agree that the upward trend is not good that's still only one KSI for approximately every 1100 vehicles or every 11million km (on an average of 10,000km per vehicle per year). We have bigger problems that don't get nearly the same attention.

[Ixion]

I was reading a blog from a cop in Texas the other night. This point came up. He reckoned it was good not having an inspection regime. He did LOTS of stops for vehicle equipment. Minor stuff like 'tag lamps' (number plate lights I think , they talk funny), brake lights. Didn't usually ticket any, but it gave him a good chance to check out the vehicle. For 'other stuff'. And if someone tried to get smart he could most always find something defective to ping them on . He reckoned that there was very little chance of a car with serious defects not being picked up by their patrols. Mind you , they seem to actually PATROL a shit load more than NZ cops.

Realistically, WoF is pretty much a waste of time. It's long since ceased to have any real safety relevance (not saying it didn't once - when they were introduced some cars were dodgy as ). Nowdays it's more a political correctness inspection. Noise, emissions, can anyone tell me how those are safety related.

They'd be better to incorporate the checks into booze bus and licence/rego stopping checkpoints which they already have. A good mechanic can suss anything seriously defective in a couple of minutes on most vehicles, nowdays.

And a WoF doesn't mean much anyway, who hasn't put on a borrowed zorst to get a WoF and stuck the noisy cans back on afterward ?

[James Deuce]

And a WoF doesn't mean much anyway, who hasn't put on a borrowed zorst to get a WoF and stuck the noisy cans back on afterward ?

No one would do that! Surely? :whistle:

[Ixion]

Innocent souls like yourself would be astounded at the depths of depraviy to which some misguided people will sink.

All I'll say is that I'd like half an hour alone with the bastard that arranged for them to record the VIN/frame number instead of just the rego plate for a WoF.

[swbarnett]

No one would do that! Surely? :whistle:
I knew someone that kept a good set of tyres in the garage just for WOFs. I was told this was common practice.

[Ocean1]

I knew someone that kept a good set of tyres in the garage just for WOFs. I was told this was common practice.

Probably still is common enough, particularly with some flavours of dirt bike.

I routinely swap my nice fresh competition knobblies on the KLX for 1/2 worn DOT complient items for a WOF. Some shops don't look too hard for the DOT, which saves you the trouble.

[Swoop]

The road toll is a lot of shit.
it gives the media something to focus on
it give the politicians something to appear to be improving
it gives the cops something to raise revenue over.
The average drip is indoctrinated to believe it is an important issue.
This is perfect for the gubbinment mentality though. It is a number and so becomes something of significance in their mind. Just like having a speed limit instead of "driving/riding to the conditions".

[TOTO]

+1

i do Already