Letter in Saturday's Harold - Police to target motorcyclists

[Ixion]

Yesterdays (Saturday 10th Jan I guess) Harold had a letter from a John Richards of Glen Eden. Mr Richards states "A police spokesperson said on the TV news that motorcyclists are to be targeted by police this year"

Mr Richards objects to being targeted.

I never watch TV so I do not know what Mr Richards is referring to, but I also dislike the idea of being targeted by the police this years.

Did anyone see the TV News item to which Mr Richards refers, and if so, what was it about ?

[Shadows]

He's probably referring to this

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4804914a11.html

"Motorcycle safety would be targeted in a new 10-year government road safety strategy to be launched early next year, she said."

[Ixion]

Perhaps, but it does not quite seem to fit. Mr Richards specifically refers to a *police* spokesperson. Of course, he may be confused.

I haven't heard anyone else mention such a statement, or any mention of a specific police campaign to target motorcyclists. . But i have seen a number of comments form police sources that might be indicative of a softening up of public opinion preparatory to launching such a campaign.

[Crazy Steve]

Yesterdays (Saturday 10th Jan I guess) Harold had a letter from a John Richards of Glen Eden. Mr Richards states "A police spokesperson said on the TV news that motorcyclists are to be targeted by police this year"

Mr Richards objects to being targeted.

I never watch TV so I do not know what Mr Richards is referring to, but I also dislike the idea of being targeted by the police this years.

Did anyone see the TV News item to which Mr Richards refers, and if so, what was it about ?

Anyone not wearing the right riding gear shouldn't get Acc coverage for that part of there body that gets damaged..

I have a friend an older rider (Born again) Limited buget for bike and gear..In two years he breaks his collar bone and massive gravel rash..In one accident.

The another 12mths later he severs his Big Toe and massive gravel rash..From not wearing any boots..

The 1st massive Acc claim could of been reduced in cost me thinks if he was wearing Good gloves...And the second could of been avoided by wearing good boots...

I dont wanna pay high Acc fees anymore....These people that arnt wearing gloves and boots....Should pay for there OWN injuries NOT ME ! ! !

Crazy Steve

[tri boy]

If your not acting like a plonker on the road, then I don't think the rozza's can do that much.
They already have radar and speed camera's, and wof/reg is a no brainer, so if they start pulling you up, unless your pissed or stoned, theres nothing to worry about.
After all, "the man" is still just the man.

[Shadows]

Perhaps, but it does not quite seem to fit. Mr Richards specifically refers to a *police* spokesperson. Of course, he may be confused.

I haven't heard anyone else mention such a statement, or any mention of a specific police campaign to target motorcyclists. . But i have seen a number of comments form police sources that might be indicative of a softening up of public opinion preparatory to launching such a campaign.

True it is of concern but the last time I checked it wasn't illegal to ride a motorcycle.

Therefore such a statement could only refer to what level of discretion the police may be afforded when deciding whether or not to prosecute for traffic offences, so anything that was stated could only affect the people already breaking the rules or those whose riding is often in the "grey areas" - such as when lane-splitting.

Most people accept that if they are caught doing something wrong they have to face the consequences. It's just a bonus if the copper decides to let you off.

[Tank]

Did anyone see the TV News item to which Mr Richards refers, and if so, what was it about ?

I didn't hear the entire quote. Just something about Thursday nights around S/W16 :rolleyes:

[Ixion]

Indeed so. But I'm just trying to find out what 'the man' said on TV.

And unfortunately, if they want to , they can indeed target bikers. F'instance. You're riding along in fairly haevy traffic, doing around 60, like all the cars around you. Not overtaking, just keeping in line. And a cop pulls you over. "Here's your ticket". Hang on, look at that stream of traffic. ALL of them doing the same speed I was. "Not interested. Only bikes get tickets".

A lot of road laws are pretty subjective too. Excessive noise. Careless use. Failure to keep left - strictly speaking , riding right wheel track is breaking the law. Stupid law, and it'd never be enforced thus - unless bikes are being targeted.

[JohnR]

He's probably referring to this

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4804914a11.html

"Motorcycle safety would be targeted in a new 10-year government road safety strategy to be launched early next year, she said."

The article quotes '...bikers killed in accidents to 50 so far this year - well ahead of the 38 deaths recorded at the same point in 2006 and in 2007.'

"She" also said 'The growth in motorcycle accidents was directly related to the number of new motorbike registrations, with about 16,000 more motorbikes registered in 2007.'

So 16000 (read it... SIXTEEN THOUSAND:shit:) more motorcycles registered results in 12more deaths:weird:

I may be an uncouth, soon to be outlawed biker but how do they get "...should be targeted" out of that?:scratch:

[SARGE]

A lot of road laws are pretty subjective too.

sorry bro..laws cant be "subjective"..

far as im concerned.. if someone pulls me up on a "subjective" law.. better be prepared for a long court fight

[Ixion]

sorry bro..laws cant be "subjective"..

far as im concerned.. if someone pulls me up on a "subjective" law.. better be prepared for a long court fight


Course they can be. Better if they aren't of course.

Excessive noise is a classic instance. Cop can give you a ticket if he think your vehicle is too noisy. Just cos it sounds noisy to him. He doesn't have to measure the noise, and it doesn't make any difference if you have a brand new WoF. All he has to do is say "Sounds too noisy to me. here's your ticket" .That's subjective.

Even driving in a manner dangerous. Cop thinks it's dangerous. Driver doesn't . That's subjective. Unsafe lane change. The cop thinks (subjectively) that it's unsafe. The definion isn't written into law any where.

Outside road area too. Disorderly conduct. My highspirited fun is his disorderly conduct. That's subjective.

Lots of subjective laws. Depend on the cops opinion. Ultimately, maybe, that gets tested in court. Still subjective, just there it's whether the judge thinks it's noisey/dangerous/unsafe/disorderly

[ffirman]

I don't think that you would get done for the riding in the right wheel track, as the road code says, that is where you are meant to ride. ie the front of the car's driver's main vision.

It was one of the questions I had to answer for the learners.

Question 33 here: http://www.drivinginstructor.co.nz/test.php?q_category=Motor%20Cycle

Cheers

Fran


Indeed so. But I'm just trying to find out what 'the man' said on TV.

And unfortunately, if they want to , they can indeed target bikers. F'instance. You're riding along in fairly haevy traffic, doing around 60, like all the cars around you. Not overtaking, just keeping in line. And a cop pulls you over. "Here's your ticket". Hang on, look at that stream of traffic. ALL of them doing the same speed I was. "Not interested. Only bikes get tickets".

A lot of road laws are pretty subjective too. Excessive noise. Careless use. Failure to keep left - strictly speaking , riding right wheel track is breaking the law. Stupid law, and it'd never be enforced thus - unless bikes are being targeted.

[Ixion]

I don't think that you would get done for the riding in the right wheel track, as the road code says, that is where you are meant to ride. ie the front of the car's driver's main vision.

It was one of the questions I had to answer for the learners.

Question 33 here: http://www.drivinginstructor.co.nz/test.php?q_category=Motor%20Cycle

Cheers

Fran

Doubt you *would* get done. But you *could*. Do a search here , it's been well covered. Legislators forgot about bikes. Again. Road code disagrees with law. Road Code is right.

[SARGE]

Course they can be. Better if they aren't of course.

Excessive noise is a classic instance. Cop can give you a ticket if he think your vehicle is too noisy. Just cos it sounds noisy to him. He doesn't have to measure the noise, and it doesn't make any difference if you have a brand new WoF. All he has to do is say "Sounds too noisy to me. here's your ticket" .That's subjective.


i carry this with me.. copy of the internationally recognized ISO standard for sound testing...



To ascertain how this 86dBA is measured you need to follow ISO 362 (practically identical to BS 3425).
There are conditions over 6 pages with all the details but these are the guts of it

-measurements shall be made in a level open area with no reflecting items (buildings, boulders, fences etc) within 50m.
-There shall be a minimum of 20metres square of ashphalt or similar road surface (that has to comply with ISO 10844... I did say it wouldn't be simple!) with a further minimum 10m stretch at either end (at least 3m wide) prior to entering the 20x20 area.
-The microphone is 7.5m away from the centreline in the middle of the 20x20 area
-4 measurements are made per side .. ie vehicle does at least 8 passes
-vehicle must be warmed up first
-As the bike approaches the 20x20m area it must be doing 50km/hr in 2nd and/or 3rd gear (if 5 forward gears or more are fitted). The bike then accelerates hard across the 20m and then the throttle is closed as the rear of the bike passes the 20m line
-if the engine RPM's exceed the maximum net power point, the test is done only in 3rd gear, otherwise both 2nd and 3rd are used
-minimum of 4 consecutive measurements must be done and be within 2 dB



if they got all that.. im happy to pony up

[doc]

If your not acting like a plonker on the road, then I don't think the rozza's can do that much.
They already have radar and speed camera's, and wof/reg is a no brainer, so if they start pulling you up, unless your pissed or stoned, theres nothing to worry about.
After all, "the man" is still just the man.

It's been coming for a while not just from the car owners complaining. I imagine some of the locals who live on the various loop/GP ride routes. Joe public gets a bit envious or sick of when they see bikers blatantly ignoring speed limits and road rules that are made for the cars. Plus if half of what gets posted on here about the exploits of some of the "Legends" is only part truth, you got say, it had to happen. :rolleyes:

[Ixion]

i carry this with me.. copy of the internationally recognized ISO standard for sound testing...





if they got all that.. im happy to pony up

Yup. That's nice. Might be useful in court. But, the cop doesn't have to take any notice whatsoever of any of that. He can just say "Don't give a stuff. It sounds too noisy to me. Here's your ticket, here's your green sticker (or pink or yellow or whatever homo colour it is), that means you can't use the bike on the road. Have a nice day.". And NZ law doesn't recognise the ISO standard for in service operations. Noice, eh.

Lots of boi racers have been down that path. Never works.

[Gummie]

How about this 10 year plan includes cages being taught that there are other vehicles on the road to. I for one paid them no mention when i had only a car licence. I was taught only to look for cars and trucks, and always drove that way. Since then i have paid us more attention, and respect for all road users.

[SARGE]

Yup. That's nice. Might be useful in court. But, the cop doesn't have to take any notice whatsoever of any of that. He can just say "Don't give a stuff. It sounds too noisy to me. Here's your ticket, here's your green sticker (or pink or yellow or whatever homo colour it is), that means you can't use the bike on the road. Have a nice day.". And NZ law doesn't recognise the ISO standard for in service operations. Noice, eh.

Lots of boi racers have been down that path. Never works.

kinda makes you want to cooperate and pull over then, dont it?

[Swoop]

I can see The Amazing Fuckoffski Brothers putting in plenty of appearances in the near future.

[Ixion]

Fortunately, cops don't seem to be too anal about exhaust noise on bikes. Much less so than cars. Maybe because they are not familiar with bikes and find it harder to judge when the noise is excessive(and risk being shown up in court by a defence lawyer "So officer, you admit that you actually have no experience of how loud a motorcycle may be as standard . Yet you etc ".)

However, there have been a few folk got done on that count. And are not at all happy about it.

Cops will always be a bit cautious about charges where the basis is subjective, because the burden of proof lies on them to show that the bike was noisy/driving was dangerous etc, beyond what the court might consider reasonable. So it's a bit of a gamble for them, and they'll generally not go down that road unless (a) you appear an easy target - young, uneducated etc ; (b) they have so much else on you that no court is going to listen to you ; or (c) the case is so way over that it can't easily be defended (" I considered the noise excessive M'Lud , cos when I stopped him and the boike was idling, my windscreen blew out , my ear drums ruptured and the windows in 10 houses around shattered").

[swbarnett]

Anyone not wearing the right riding gear shouldn't get Acc coverage for that part of there body that gets damaged..
This path leads to the banning of motorcycles completely! Don't go there!

[Ixion]

Well, as none has any idea what Mr Richards was talking about, I shall assume that he was a bit confused, and the item was just the usual "wah wah bikers need to take care, must e more careful wah wah" stuff.

[Tone165]

Welcome to my world!

2 years back, we had a similar "Blitz" on bikes in Qld.

It was a nightmare..

Bikes WERE plucked from traffic flow and hit with speeding fines, Groups of coppers were dispatched to known bike haunts to bulk issue "excessive noise" notices, and many dubious accusations were made. The newspapers went along for the ride, and it verged on comedy sometimes!

I had 2 tickets for speeding, when I wasn't! I do speed, but I always assumed that the Police actually had to prove that I was at the time of the ticket...not so!

Qld Police have no reason to lie.........so I must be!

My dealings (limited) with NZ Police, by comparison to the Jackbooted Nazi that is the Qld Policeman...as Fred Dagg used to say.."You don't know how lucky you are!"

I got pulled over on Sunday by a real pleasant cop, (who also rides) he gave me a warning and a freindly attitude, so there are still some good ones out there..but the odds are not great!

[Katman]

Plus if half of what gets posted on here about the exploits of some of the "Legends" is only part truth, you got say, it had to happen. :rolleyes:

See now, when I say that I get :bash:

As for the exhaust issue - it could still end up going a whole lot further.

If the government wants to get really nasty we could quite easily see - 'No motorcycle exhaust shall be replaced with any component not designed by manufacturer as OEM equipment'.

[scumdog]

"The sky is falling..the sky is falling...."

So sayeth 'the man'.

[Big Chim]

If your being targeted, watch out for the U turn!!!!

[schado]

One should wonder why it is that the police are instructed to target motorcycle riders. We are road users that at least likely to kill anyone else except for ourselves if we make a mistake or an error of judgement - be it failing to judge corner or braking distance, or be it our judgement to cause a bit of extra tunnel vision & wind speed. I suspect that the government is predicting a massive increase in the use of motorcycles on NZ roads due to individuals economics.ie; we are all getting poorer. Oh goodie... nice place to gather even more than the current 42m bucks the extort out of us.

[Marmoot]

I don't think that you would get done for the riding in the right wheel track, as the road code says, that is where you are meant to ride. ie the front of the car's driver's main vision.

Hmm...i've been riding it wrong all these years. Guilty as charged.

Next time I see cars I'd better do what I am required to do: overtake the cars and ride in the front of the cars' drivers' main vision.

And as for bikers being targeted, the cause would only be one: recession!

[Tony]

And as for bikers being targeted, the cause would only be one: recession!

I don't think there is anything vindictive or recession related in targeting motorcyclists. Their charter and mandate is to reduce the number of road deaths. Road deaths increased significantly for motorcyclists last year. Yeah I acknowledge that at micro level some cops may need to hit their quota targets from time to time and increase the number of tickets instead of warnings they issue.

If your responsibility was to reduce road deaths it would make sense to take a closer look at what's killing us.

I believe that some of the new proposals being put forward are excellent while others are counter productive or just punitive.

Perhaps it would be fun to create a thread with our own wish list for new rules to make the roads, otehr drivers and ourselves safer.

I would start by making protective boots, gloves, jackets and pants compulsory (ATGATT).

Perhaps it would be nice to see a police target on signalling, following distances, unreasonably slow drivers. Perhaps this could be an advisory campaign where drivers are pulled over and given warnings and a mintie for there mintie moment. These warnings could be written up and included in a traffic officers indivdual quotas - so their bosses know they are out there pulling their weight.

Oh and while I am it, make defensive cognitive (theory) and vehicle skills handling tests compulsory for all drivers as part of the GDLS. And for god sake up the ante on the basic motor cycle skills handling test, its a joke. I did mine on an automatic scooter and never exceeded 5mph! The tests at the minimum should include emergency skid control for cars (easily to do safely on a skid pan) and emergency braking tests for car drives and bikes.

Every driver should also have to read. "Down with Speed (http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/ACC672-Down-with-speed.pdf)" (Ignoring the introductory propoganda summary which actually contradicts some of the real information in the document.

Oh and one more rule: for every new rule enacted the person putting forward the rule should nominate two rules to be scrapped.

Boy with all the new rule ideas I've have, I am going to have my work cut out!

[Badjelly]

I don't think that you would get done for the riding in the right wheel track, as the road code says, that is where you are meant to ride. ie the front of the car's driver's main vision.


Doubt you *would* get done. But you *could*. Do a search here, it's been well covered. Legislators forgot about bikes. Again. Road code disagrees with law. Road Code is right.

I did do a search--quite a few searches actually--and didn't come up with anything relevant. Can you give me a hint?

As far as keeping left on unlaned roads , the Road Code says

To stay well out of the way of oncoming vehicles, always keep as close as possible to the left side of the road.
and follows it with a picture showing cars and bikes on an unlaned road, with the bikes not keeping as close as possible to the left side of the road.

http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/roadcode/gfx/unlaned-road.jpg

[MotoGirl]

There was a comment on 3 News after the official holiday period ended that mentioned the goals for the year: reduce the road toll, target speeding, and target motorcyclists. There was no mention of exactly what they're targeting motorcyclists for.

[Badjelly]

There was a comment on 3 News after the official holiday period ended that mentioned the goals for the year: reduce the road toll, target speeding, and target motorcyclists. There was no mention of exactly what they're targeting motorcyclists for.

Or with. :ar15:

[vifferman]

As far as keeping left on unlaned roads , the Road Code says:

"To stay well out of the way of oncoming vehicles, always keep as close as possible to the left side of the road."

and follows it with a picture showing cars and bikes on an unlaned road, with the bikes not keeping as close as possible to the left side of the road.
It used to say, "...as close to the left as practicable". Perhaps people don't know what that means, which is a shame, as it's much more meaningful and pragmatic than "possible".

[FastBikeGear]

There was a comment on 3 News after the official holiday period ended that mentioned the goals for the year: reduce the road toll, target speeding, and target motorcyclists. There was no mention of exactly what they're targeting motorcyclists for.

I think the police should come out and state they are going to target those cultural groups/races who represent a greater proportion of convicted criminals - I am of course not seriously suggesting this ...but it has the same logic as targetting motorcyclists. Had a big argument in our family over this today.

[Badjelly]

It used to say, "...as close to the left as practicable". Perhaps people don't know what that means, which is a shame, as it's much more meaningful and pragmatic than "possible".

Indeed. Imagine if people really did keep as close to the left as possible. Lets be generous and allow them half a metre . So all the vehicles would be driving along 0.5 m from the gutter, pulling out to go around parked cars, then back into position 0.5 m from the gutter. When it's a conflict between the Road Code and common sense, the choice is obvious.

[swbarnett]

If your responsibility was to reduce road deaths it would make sense to take a closer look at what's killing us.
If they really did take an "honest" closer look they'd find that the problem is that there are more bikes on the road. The increase in motorcycle related deaths is directly proportional to this.

Maybe they know this already and realise that the only way to reduce motorcycle related deaths is to reduce the number of motorcycles?


I would start by making protective boots, gloves, jackets and pants compulsory (ATGATT).
Some bikers really don't like bikes. This sort of thinking is very counter-productive. It is imperative that we all be allowed to choose our own risk level and our own ways of mitigating the risks we face.

The first thing on any protective clothing list lies between your ears. Someone wearing nothing except for this is a lot safer than one in full gear that's left theirs at home.

[scumdog]

The first thing on any protective clothing list lies between your ears. Someone wearing nothing except for this is a lot safer than one in full gear that's left theirs at home.

Summed up quite nicely.....

[Katman]

This whole 'the motorcyclist's road toll is increasing proportionally with the increase of bikes on the road' is bullshit.

The road toll for motorcyclists has always been disproportionately high for the percentage of road users we make up. Time everyone woke up to that fact.

[Ixion]

Well, of course it has.That's a silly argument. So has cyclists. So has pedestrians. For the same reason. No metal shielding. For the same reason, truck drivers is disproportionately low. Cos clearly, if a truck and a motorcycle collide, it doesn't take an Einstein to work out which one is more likely to be killed dead.

[Katman]

Cos clearly, if a truck and a motorcycle collide, it doesn't take an Einstein to work out which one is more likely to be killed dead.


The basis of your argument makes as much sense as dropping your bottom lip, stamping your feet and crying "It's not fair - car drivers can drive like fuckwits and survive accidents - why can't we?"

[cs363]

Plus if half of what gets posted on here about the exploits of some of the "Legends" is only part truth, you got say, it had to happen. :rolleyes:


Would that be a case of the Few stuffing it up for the many? :whistle:

[cs363]

He's probably referring to this

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4804914a11.html

"Motorcycle safety would be targeted in a new 10-year government road safety strategy to be launched early next year, she said."


This guy: Quote 'The Canterbury regional co-ordinator of Motorcycling New Zealand, Ray Shearman, said he had been riding motorcycles for over 50 years.

More people were getting on to motorcycles because they were cheaper to run.

"All I've done is lost me finger one finger and a broken leg through no fault of my own," Shearman said.

He regularly rode with "about 50 other jokers all different shapes and sizes, and they're all careful riders, they all want to see tomorrow," he said.

"You can't take too many risks. I've been cut off by bloody car drivers and they're friggin' females and the people using cellphones when they're driving and that's absolutely dangerous.

"I got cleaned up by a Land Rover and the joker said to me `Oh, I was planning my day,' and I said `Well I was planning my bloody day before I left home at 5.45am."

"It's cheap transport, I'll say that much. But riding a motorcycle, you've got to be careful."
' end quote.


Is a fucking idiot. :nono:

[swbarnett]

This whole 'the motorcyclist's road toll is increasing proportionally with the increase of bikes on the road' is bullshit.
The point of this argument is that nothing has changed so people need to stop claiming that we motorcyclists are in more danger than ever - we're not.


The road toll for motorcyclists has always been disproportionately high for the percentage of road users we make up. Time everyone woke up to that fact.
People make mistakes.

This is a fact that noone can change unless you believe in an omnipotent being.

The mistake per mile ratio is probably the same irrespective of the vehicle type (I suspect it's actually lower for experienced motorcyclists). This brings me to my second fact - a mistake on a motorcycle is likely to be more costly than in any other land-based motorised vehicle. This is something that we, as motorcyclists, accept because of the rewards motorcycling brings.

The above leads logically to the fact that the death and injury toll will always be higher for motorcycles. Get used to it.

[Katman]

This brings me to my second fact - a mistake on a motorcycle is likely to be more costly than in any other land-based motorised vehicle.

And the fact that most of those mistakes are the fault of irresponsible or incompetant riding is the reason we are copping the attention that we currently are.

[swbarnett]

And the fact that most of those mistakes are the fault of irresponsible or incompetant riding is the reason we are copping the attention that we currently are.
Or maybe it's just the fact that the machines are operated my a fallibale being?

You don't have to be irresponsible or incompetant to make mistakes, just human.

[Katman]

You don't have to be irresponsible or incompetant to make mistakes, just human.

Pull your head out of your arse.

I said most of those mistakes - not all.

[MarkH]

Indeed. Imagine if people really did keep as close to the left as possible. Lets be generous and allow them half a metre . So all the vehicles would be driving along 0.5 m from the gutter, pulling out to go around parked cars, then back into position 0.5 m from the gutter.

I think such driving would hardly be practicable! Just as well the road code doesn't say we have to drive/ride as far to the left as possible, God damn that would be stupid!

[MarkH]

I would start by making protective boots, gloves, jackets and pants compulsory (ATGATT).

Crap idea - imagine when they tell us that we should destroy all our existing gear and only use the stuff with the new NZ M/C safety approval tag on it.
I do think motorcyclists SHOULD wear ATGATT, but I don't think the cops should be out trying to find motorcyclists wearing sneakers to ticket.

I don't want to be forced to wear leather pants for around town riding in Summer either - I'll take the chance with my Dragin' Jeans and avoid passing out with heatstroke! I DO wear boots, gloves, helmet and jacket of course, but legislation for all the gear would be difficult to create and difficult to enforce.

[piston broke]

The basis of your argument makes as much sense as dropping your bottom lip, stamping your feet and crying "It's not fair - car drivers can drive like fuckwits and survive accidents - why can't we?"

get real.
there is no doubt that on a bike we are more vunerable.
the numbers don't make us all the antichrist you try to make us out to be

[cs363]

The above leads logically to the fact that the death and injury toll will always be higher for motorcycles. Get used to it.



Playing Devil's Advocate here a bit but;

I believe that the general concensus is that the accident and injury rates for cars overall (that is, not including the odd spike here and there) has dropped over the years despite many more vehicles being used on our roads, again the general belief is that this has arisen due to better designed/safer roads and safer vehicles (more passive and active safety features, allied with better tyres/brakes and so on). I don't have any fact and figures to back this up, just a general belief based on media reports and the like over recent years.

If I look at the average bike on the roads these days I think it would be fair to say that they are generally inherently safer than the bikes my friends and I grew up with in the late 70's -early 80's when we were in our 'at risk' years.
I mean, modern bikes by and large have good frames, excellent brakes, better power delivery, infinitely better tyres with larger contact patches and superb wet weather performance - all things that were fairly alien to us back then.
So I think it would be entirely plausible to claim that modern bikes are safer and even though we are enjoying a boom of sorts in sales and overall motorcyle usage of late I'm fairly certain that there aren't the numbers of motorcyclists on the roads now that there were back then....... so, if the accident rates are increasing then it does tend to point to an increase in incompetence on the riders part.....doesn't it?

Or am I missing something?


Discuss.....

[piston broke]

Playing Devil's Advocate here a bit but;

I believe that the general concensus is that the accident and injury rates for cars overall (that is, not including the odd spike here and there) has dropped over the years despite many more vehicles being used on our roads, again the general belief is that this has arisen due to better designed/safer roads and safer vehicles (more passive and active safety features, allied with better tyres/brakes and so on). I don't have any fact and figures to back this up, just a general belief based on media reports and the like over recent years.

If I look at the average bike on the roads these days I think it would be fair to say that they are generally inherently safer than the bikes my friends and I grew up with in the late 70's -early 80's when we were in our 'at risk' years.
I mean, modern bikes by and large have good frames, excellent brakes, better power delivery, infinitely better tyres with larger contact patches and superb wet weather performance - all things that were fairly alien to us back then.
So I think it would be entirely plausible to claim that modern bikes are safer and even though we are enjoying a boom of sorts in sales and overall motorcyle usage of late I'm fairly certain that there aren't the numbers of motorcyclists on the roads now that there were back then....... so, if the accident rates are increasing then it does tend to point to an increase in incompetence on the riders part.....doesn't it?

Or am I missing something?


Discuss.....

yes agreed,but,
there is way more traffic on those same roads.
so the risks are higher.
and the bikes and cars are way more powerful now.
still no more protection around a bike if the shite hits the fan tho

[cs363]

yes agreed,but,
there is way more traffic on those same roads.
so the risks are higher.
and the bikes and cars are way more powerful now.
still no more protection around a bike if the shite hits the fan tho


Agreed re: traffic volumes - BUT, if what I am led to believe is correct, there has been a sharp rise in single vehicle motorcycle accidents (i.e. assumed rider error as opposed to the usual U-turn/failure to give way etc we're all familiar with) particularly in the Thames/Coromandel region. This would lead me to believe that this translates to MotoGP wannabe's tossing it away on the Kopu-Hikuwai or similar having pushed the envelope beyond their skill level/bike-tyre-brake/realms of decency/whatever etc limits or some such?

[Ixion]

So I think it would be entirely plausible to claim that modern bikes are safer and even though we are enjoying a boom of sorts in sales and overall motorcyle usage of late I'm fairly certain that there aren't the numbers of motorcyclists on the roads now that there were back then....... so, if the accident rates are increasing then it does tend to point to an increase in incompetence on the riders part.....doesn't it?

Or am I missing something?


Discuss.....

But, they are not. The absolute NUMBER of accidents is increasing , because there are more bikes on the road. But the accident RATE is falling.

F'instance, if you had only 2 bikes in some area , and one crashed that would be one crash, and an accident rate of 50% . If the next district had e10 bikes, and 2 of them crashed that is two accidents (twice as many! ) but an accident rate of only 20% . Which is the safer district ?

Moreover much of the improvemnt in car casualties has been due to passive safety improvements. Crumple zones, side intrusion bars, seat belts, collapsible steering columns . Things that help save your life, reduce injury when you DO crash. Not so many have been active safety features, to stop crashes in the first place (there are some - ABS is an obvious one). Whereas almost all the improvements in bikes has been in active safety - things that make it less likely we will crash in the first place. But once the crash happens the Ancient Codger on his BSA is no better or worse off than Squidly McSquid on the CBSXZRRRRRR1000RRRRR. Helmets is about the only passive safety thing on bikes in the last 50 years, and in terms of surviveability they haven't changed anything to speak of in the last 30. And to make it worse, many of the improvements are not really safety improvements at all, they are just improvements that make it easier for riders to go faster. Modern tyres mean you can go round the corner faster than Ancient Codger on that BSA. But when you encounter gravel half way round your super sticky tyres are probably worse, certainly no better than his 400x18s

The car focus on passive safety reflects into the police attitide - of hammering on about speed because "it reduces the trauma" but ignoring the absolute shit quality of the driving in the first place. "We know you're going to crash, it's too hard to stop that, but we'll work on making it so you don't die when you do.".

But -- it doesn't work for bikes. We have no passive safety features. And no protection. So if we do crash, we probably die.Even if we are well under the speed limit. Ergo, the only message for bikers has to be "Don't crash. Ride safely". But it's a message ignored by TPTB.

[ntst8]

For my own amusement i looked up the NZ population and road toll for every year back to 1925 (as far as i could find both on the interweb thingy) and last year was the second lowest death per capita in that time - and the only year which was better was 1945, when those who were not on the roads were really risking life and limb. And these figures take no account of how average mileage (and so potential exposure to risk) has increased over the years.
I do tire of the govt manufactured hysteria on the road toll.

[Katman]

still no more protection around a bike if the shite hits the fan tho

So why do so many motorcyclists actively go searching for shit to throw at the fan?

[Katman]

Ergo, the only message for bikers has to be "Don't crash. Ride safely". But it's a message ignored by TPTB.

And by far too many motorcyclists.

[swbarnett]

Pull your head out of your arse.

I said most of those mistakes - not all.
This is where we differ. I believe that most mistakes are due to basic human falability.

[MotoGirl]

I don't know whether scooter accidents are included in the statistics for motorcycle accidents, but I'm picking they are. So, provided my assumption is correct...

Why are the Police not targeting the riders of scooters and encouraging them to wear protective gear? Are their spills not using ACC funds too? I'm constantly seeing people riding around (like fuckwits, might I add) wearing next to nothing and you know it's going to hurt when they come off.

I do know the gear isn't going to stop people riding like dicks; however, won't it help reduce the injuries when the rider's stupidity finally catches up with him/her?

If reducing motorcycle accidents (and the ACC funds being used) is a priority, maybe they should look at all groups included in those statistics.

[cs363]

But, they are not. The absolute NUMBER of accidents is increasing , because there are more bikes on the road. But the accident RATE is falling.

F'instance, if you had only 2 bikes in some area , and one crashed that would be one crash, and an accident rate of 50% . If the next district had e10 bikes, and 2 of them crashed that is two accidents (twice as many! ) but an accident rate of only 20% . Which is the safer district ?

Moreover much of the improvemnt in car casualties has been due to passive safety improvements. Crumple zones, side intrusion bars, seat belts, collapsible steering columns . Things that help save your life, reduce injury when you DO crash. Not so many have been active safety features, to stop crashes in the first place (there are some - ABS is an obvious one). Whereas almost all the improvements in bikes has been in active safety - things that make it less likely we will crash in the first place. But once the crash happens the Ancient Codger on his BSA is no better or worse off than Squidly McSquid on the CBSXZRRRRRR1000RRRRR. Helmets is about the only passive safety thing on bikes in the last 50 years, and in terms of surviveability they haven't changed anything to speak of in the last 30. And to make it worse, many of the improvements are not really safety improvements at all, they are just improvements that make it easier for riders to go faster. Modern tyres mean you can go round the corner faster than Ancient Codger on that BSA. But when you encounter gravel half way round your super sticky tyres are probably worse, certainly no better than his 400x18s

The car focus on passive safety reflects into the police attitide - of hammering on about speed because "it reduces the trauma" but ignoring the absolute shit quality of the driving in the first place. "We know you're going to crash, it's too hard to stop that, but we'll work on making it so you don't die when you do.".

But -- it doesn't work for bikes. We have no passive safety features. And no protection. So if we do crash, we probably die.Even if we are well under the speed limit. Ergo, the only message for bikers has to be "Don't crash. Ride safely". But it's a message ignored by TPTB.


Interesting point regarding accident rates vs actual numbers, yet another way statistics can be fudged. :)
I think you are being a bit dismissive of modern riding gear though - back in the day there wasn't really a lot of good gear to be had, leather jackets were an expensive luxury and even then rarely had any armour - if you were lucky there was a bit of padding that was good for bugger all in the event of a crash. Full face helmets were in their infancy, the normal riding gear for most was jeans and probably a jean jacket or something similar, and wet weather gear was PVC, yellow and bloody horrible in most cases!

Now even chap gear usually has some form of armour, with the more expensive stuff having proper CE approved armour, riders often wear back protectors and now chest protection is beginning to appear (a surprising number of deaths/serious injuries of motorcyclists is from chest impacts), helmets are lighter and more protective than ever, even gloves and boots have advanced dramatically. Sure, not everyone has really good gear but the difference is that it is readily available these days.

One of my thoughts is that modern bikes are so capable the limits of handling, tyres, brakes and so on is so much higher than the wobbly, underbraked, ground clearance limited shitboxes we used to ride that there is no artificial limit placed on the rider so those pushing the boundaries (as you do at a certain age) are much closer to the limits than we ever were and travelling at substantially higher velocities.

[cs363]

I don't know whether scooter accidents are included in the statistics for motorcycle accidents, but I'm picking they are. So, provided my assumption is correct...

Why are the Police not targeting the riders of scooters and encouraging them to wear protective gear? Are their spills not using ACC funds too? I'm constantly seeing people riding around (like fuckwits, might I add) wearing next to nothing and you know it's going to hurt when they come off.

I do know the gear isn't going to stop people riding like dicks; however, won't it help reduce the injuries when the rider's stupidity finally catches up with him/her?

If reducing motorcycle accidents (and the ACC funds being used) is a priority, maybe they should look at all groups included in those statistics.

Whilst I agree with our right to decide and would hate to see the use of gear enforced, I do think that Traffic Police taking a proactive approach and pointing out the errors of such riders ways to them might be a good idea.

For instance, as an experienced rider if I choose knowing the risks to ride down to the dairy wearing jeans and a t-shirt then that should be up to me. I think the really worrying thing is that many of the people you see on scooters and other bikes wearing bugger all gear (and often riding in a dangerous manner) simply don't realise what a danger to themslves they are.

[vtec]

I don't know if it's my new VFR400R or the fact that I've just moved out to dodgy Henderson. But in the last few days, I've been pulled over for no reason once, and tailed by plainclothes police cars twice on the motorway. Everytime I knew they were there and was riding accordingly, but still I'm feeling very nervous and very targeted right now.

First cop that pulled me over, seemed stern but then told me he was just checking it was me on the bike, ie. it wasn't stolen. Which actually made me feel better. But I can't help but think that was simply to make me feel better after he followed me for a few k's waiting for me to do something stupid (which I often like to do).

12 extra deaths from 16000 in one year seems acceptable to me. There's plenty of idiots who ride bikes. And you can't tell me those deaths were all the fault of the riders. It's just sad when it's noobs or born agains taken out because they were expecting cars to actually give way. If you don't expect anyone to give way, then you usually do Ok and can avoid 99% of people trying to maim you in their cars.

[cs363]

I don't know if it's my new VFR400R or the fact that I've just moved out to dodgy Henderson. But in the last few days, I've been pulled over for no reason once, and tailed by plainclothes police cars twice on the motorway. Everytime I knew they were there and was riding accordingly, but still I'm feeling very nervous and very targeted right now.

First cop that pulled me over, seemed stern but then told me he was just checking it was me on the bike, ie. it wasn't stolen. Which actually made me feel better. But I can't help but think that was simply to make me feel better after he followed me for a few k's waiting for me to do something stupid (which I often like to do).



Bit of a difficult one that - I've got a mate in Auckland that has a mint (un-boyracer'd) Mitsubishi Lancer Tommi Makinen Edition Evo 6.5, he's selling it for that exact reason - he's sick of being pulled over and checked out by the cops or shadowed etc all the time.
But like I said to him, if little knob-jockey-johnny the homie car thief had just pinched your Lancer you'd be bloody glad the cops were doing their job......
Not really the cops fault in this instance, they're doing what we pay them for - the blame lies with the low lifes that steal cars and bikes and force us to spend heaps on security and insurance.

[MotoGirl]

Whilst I agree with our right to decide and would hate to see the use of gear enforced, I do think that Traffic Police taking a proactive approach and pointing out the errors of such riders ways to them might be a good idea.

For instance, as an experienced rider if I choose knowing the risks to ride down to the dairy wearing jeans and a t-shirt then that should be up to me. I think the really worrying thing is that many of the people you see on scooters and other bikes wearing bugger all gear (and often riding in a dangerous manner) simply don't realise what a danger to themslves they are.

I completely agree with you. That's why I would like to see scooter riders encouraged to wear the gear. ATGATT is an overkill in some circumstances so I also wouldn't want to see this being compulsory.

[swbarnett]

Interesting point regarding accident rates vs actual numbers, yet another way statistics can be fudged. :)
More like made more accurate. What we're intereseted in is an individual motorcyclist's statistical likelihood of suffering an injury or fatality. The absolute number does not even come close to telling us this, the number per registered motorcycle does. We can see that this is actually falling. It has been trending downwards for decades. Probably at least in part due to the improvement in riding gear you quite rightly mention.

I've attached two graphs that I produced from data in http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motor-Vehicle-Crashes-in-New-Zealand-2007.pdf. I think they clearly show the downward trend.

[cs363]

More like made more accurate. What we're intereseted in is an individual motorcyclist's statistical likelihood of suffering an injury or fatality. The absolute number does not even come close to telling us this, the number per registered motorcycle does. We can see that this is actually falling. It has been trending downwards for decades. Probably at least in part due to the improvement in riding gear you quite rightly mention.

I've attached two graphs that I produced from data in http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/NewPDFs/Motor-Vehicle-Crashes-in-New-Zealand-2007.pdf. I think they clearly show the downward trend.


Wasn't getting at you with that comment, just making passing comment about how LTSA and co twist statistics to suit their purpose - which you above post ably illustrates! :)

Your research shows what I would have expected given my previous comments.
So if the number of accidents in the Thames-Coromandel area is indeed bucking the trend (do we have any proof of this?) it would appear to be that the likely cause of the majority are riders exceeding their capabilities?

[Badjelly]

This whole 'the motorcyclist's road toll is increasing proportionally with the increase of bikes on the road' is bullshit.

The road toll for motorcyclists has always been disproportionately high for the percentage of road users we make up. Time everyone woke up to that fact.

I fail to see how these two statements (increase is proportional to number of bikes; always been disproportionately high relative to other vehicle types) are in any way incompatible with each other.

[swbarnett]

Wasn't getting at you with that comment,
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I'd taken it personally.


So if the number of accidents in the Thames-Coromandel area is indeed bucking the trend (do we have any proof of this?) it would appear to be that the likely cause of the majority are riders exceeding their capabilities?
From what I've heard in other threads the cause may not be that riders are exceeding their capabilities any more than on any other similar road, just that the surroundings on the Coro loop are less forgiving so that when you do come off there's more to hit and the injuries are consequently higher. Maybe someone with more direct experience of the loop would care to comment?

[Ixion]

Well, of course, it is only a few years since the Kopu Rd was sealed. Before that, a Coromandel loop would have involved a lot of gravel road. So not many sprotsbikers would have done it. So we can't compare crash rates pre sealing to post sealing

[Katman]

I fail to see how these two statements (increase is proportional to number of bikes; always been disproportionately high relative to other vehicle types) are in any way incompatible with each other.

My post may have been slightly misleading.

I didn't mean that the figures indicating that the accident rate is increasing proportionately to the number of bikes, is bullshit - I meant that looking at it that way and just saying "Meh, we're crazy bikers, what can you do?" is bullshit.

As I said, we have always been disproportionately represented in accident figures and it is up to us to try to reverse that trend.

If we can't be arsed trying, you can be safely assured that someone else will try to do so on our behalf.

[oldrider]

As I said, we have always been disproportionately represented in accident figures and it is up to us to try to reverse that trend.

If we can't be arsed trying, you can be safely assured that someone else will try to do so on our behalf.

Have to agree! Quite clearly stated. :whistle:

Sometimes we can be our own worst enemies. :yes:

Katman does not speak with faulse teeth in this post. :oi-grr: John.

[MarkH]

I don't know whether scooter accidents are included in the statistics for motorcycle accidents, but I'm picking they are. So, provided my assumption is correct...

Why are the Police not targeting the riders of scooters and encouraging them to wear protective gear? Are their spills not using ACC funds too? I'm constantly seeing people riding around (like fuckwits, might I add) wearing next to nothing and you know it's going to hurt when they come off.

I do know the gear isn't going to stop people riding like dicks; however, won't it help reduce the injuries when the rider's stupidity finally catches up with him/her?

Why scooter riders? I have seen as many on motorcycles wearing t-shirt, shorts, no gloves, etc. Mainly over the last few weeks with all the hot weather we have had.

I think they should encourage every rider to wear appropriate gear. Even a 50cc scooter rider has to wear a helmet and I think they should wear gloves and a jacket as well - a spill at 50kph could do some nasty damage to bare hands!

[cs363]

Why scooter riders? I have seen as many on motorcycles wearing t-shirt, shorts, no gloves, etc. Mainly over the last few weeks with all the hot weather we have had.

I think they should encourage every rider to wear appropriate gear. Even a 50cc scooter rider has to wear a helmet and I think they should wear gloves and a jacket as well - a spill at 50kph could do some nasty damage to bare hands!


I think MotoGirl was making the comment as scooter riders do seem to be less inclined to wear protective gear most of the time compared with motorcycle riders, though as you correctly state hot weather such as we are experiencing lately brings out the worst in all riders as far as lack of gear goes.
And I agree, it would be good proactive policing if all riders were gently but firmly persuaded to ride with apprpriate gear.

Coming home from town just now I saw this idiot on a scooter wearing a (very) old open face helmet, singlet, board shorts and (the horror!) jandals and worse still he was pinned, weaving in and out of cars. Scary!

[vifferman]

Coming home from town just now I saw this idiot on a scooter wearing a (very) old open face helmet, singlet, board shorts and (the horror!) jandals
Luxury!
I saw one a while back dressed as above, but with no footwear...

Saw one last week wearing a bicycle helmet. I bet that was nice and cool. :niceone:

[riffer]

My post may have been slightly misleading.

I didn't mean that the figures indicating that the accident rate is increasing proportionately to the number of bikes, is bullshit - I meant that looking at it that way and just saying "Meh, we're crazy bikers, what can you do?" is bullshit.

As I said, we have always been disproportionately represented in accident figures and it is up to us to try to reverse that trend.

If we can't be arsed trying, you can be safely assured that someone else will try to do so on our behalf.

Yeah, good post. You know though, I'm not entirely convinced that the majority harbour an apathetic or negative attitude towards road safety. Unfortunately for us, motorcycling does tend to attract the individualistic, anti-authoritarian types and we do tend to have a negative attitude towards being told what to do.

I'd say the majority of people on KB actually do share the same opinion as you mate. Trouble is, as you've pointed out ad nauseum, attention does tend to be focussed towards the negative attitudes.

So what can do about the minority giving the majority a bad name? Human society's been trying to find the answer to that for millennia, and politicians have been passing punitive laws that punish the innocent to catch the guilty for years.

I don't think we're going to change the general public's opinion of us in a hurry; I'm not sure if I'd like to either. Although I'm not (much), I kind of like being perceived as a bit of a bad boy...

Even if we reduce the accident rate to zero, I still think public perception will remain.

[Katman]

So what can do about the minority giving the majority a bad name?



Even if we reduce the accident rate to zero, I still think public perception will remain.

Peer pressure has changed the way drink driving is perceived. The same approach could be taken towards reckless riding.

And an accident rate of zero? - (even though it is inconceivable to even hope for it). I think the publics perception would be very different.

[riffer]

Peer pressure has changed the way drink driving is perceived. The same approach could be taken towards reckless riding.

And an accident rate of zero? - (even though it is inconceivable to even hope for it). I think the publics perception would be very different.


We've got a long way to go before we even agree on what "reckless" actually means though.

You know, I read that ACC report that was posted last night. There was an interesting bit in there where they reckoned that exceeding the speed limit by 5 km/hr put you in as much risk as driving with an alcohol limit of 80mcg per 100 mls of blood.

And that our roads were designed back when the speed limit was 80 km/hr so it was reckless to attempt to exceed that speed now.

So, if that's ACC's definitions of reckless, we've got a long way to travel before we ever hit ANY common ground with TPTB.

[Ixion]

We've got a long way to go before we even agree on what "reckless" actually means though.

You know, I read that ACC report that was posted last night. There was an interesting bit in there where they reckoned that exceeding the speed limit by 5 km/hr put you in as much risk as driving with an alcohol limit of 80mcg per 100 mls of blood.

And that our roads were designed back when the speed limit was 80 km/hr so it was reckless to attempt to exceed that speed now.

So, if that's ACC's definitions of reckless, we've got a long way to travel before we ever hit ANY common ground with TPTB.

I cannot authoritatively comment on the 5kph worse than 80mcg thing, though it sounds total garbage.

However the "roads were designed for 80kph" I *can* authoritatively say is complete rubbish and deliberate disinformation.

The speed limit was only 80kph (50mph) for a very short period at the time of the great Petrol Crisis. Before that the speed ,limit was 90kph (55mph) and after it 100kph.

However most of the roads designed in the 50s and 60s were designed for speeds much higher than that. In that era there was an expectation (realised in the German Autobahn) that vehicle speeds would keep rising. Most of the main roads and motorways of the period were in fact designed for speeds of up to 100mph . That's MILES per hour not kilometres.

What is this report you mention? Does it have an author? I'll write to them and blow them up. And demand authority for their other claim

[Ixion]

I completely agree with you. That's why I would like to see scooter riders encouraged to wear the gear. ATGATT is an overkill in some circumstances so I also wouldn't want to see this being compulsory.

I am an heretic. I don't believe in the Magic Gear. Certainly protective wear is a good thing. It will help stop you suffering rash injuries in a minor spill , and may help cushion impact injuries. But it is limited to turning a nasty crash into a not quite so nasty one.

The Magic Gear will not stop your head being split open like a water melon. It will not stop your leg being ripped completely off. It will not stop you breaking your neck. It will not stop your aorta being ripped out of your heart when you impact a solid surface. It will not stop you being burned to death. It is unlikely to stop your femoral artery being severed so that you bleed to death in a few seconds. It will not stop you dying of internal bleeding after your liver and spleen are ruptured. Seen most of those. That's what happens in a crash. It will, in short , not make you invulnerable. Sorry. They lied to you. Oh , and by the way I have some bad news about Santa Claus , too.

Magic Gear seems to me to be very much the same sort of cocoon thinking of air bags and intrusion bars. "Oh, I'm going to crash, but it will be OK, the Magic Gear will protect me". No, it won't . Crash, and you die. That's the brutal reality of biking. And, for that matter, the Magic Gear of today isn't much better than what we had 40 years ago. More colourful, cooler, lighter, and less work to maintain. But you still die just as easily.

Oh, if the biker gods fancy you you may get away with it this time, and even the next. But sooner or later they'll get tired of you and piss on you. Then you die.

The ONLY way not to die is not to crash.

[Katman]

So, if that's ACC's definitions of reckless, we've got a long way to travel before we ever hit ANY common ground with TPTB.

And that's the problem - the powers that be aren't looking for "common ground". They're looking to change things by force.

[riffer]

What is this report you mention? Does it have an author? I'll write to them and blow them up. And demand authority for their other claim


It's called Down with Speed.

http://www.acc.co.nz/DIS_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_ip/documents/internet/wcm000021.pdf

A quote from the document:

They reported a previous study conducted
in Adelaide by McLean, Holubowycz, and Sandow
(1980, cited in Kloeden et al, 1997) that related the risk of
crash involvement to a driver’s blood alcohol concentration
(BAC)16. Kloeden et al concluded that quite small increases
in speed result in an increase in the relative risk of crash
involvement that is comparable to illegal blood alcohol levels.
A 5-kph increase in speed above 60 kph (in a 60-kph zone)
increases the risk of a casualty crash by roughly the same
amount as an increase in blood alcohol concentration from
0 to 50 mg/100 ml. The results are summarised in Table A1
and Figure A3 below. An example of comparable relative risk
is the risk of involvement in a casualty crash when travelling
at 70 kph in a 60-kph zone or when driving with a BAC of
80 mg/100 ml.

sorry, it appears my memory wasn't perfect. Still a bold call.

[candor]

ACC is worried about costly longterm injuries with the rising crash rate - not your lives. I heard it too re targetingh but caught no detail. This may help... it seems like Cops want to pass the bike buck to ACC with education push. Tho some targeting of bikers for intersection running seems on the cards.

REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEEReport of the Regional Transport Committee of the Waikato Regional Council held inthe Council Chambers, Environment Waikato (Waikato Regional Council) office, 1 Dec 2008

D Williams noted the sale of motorcycles has increased over 60% in thelast three years. In terms of minimising the risk of motorcyclists it isnecessary to look at the cause. Parking needs to be provided toencourage the continued use of motorcycles.The number ofmotorcycles on the road is very high. Motorcyclists are the statistic andnot the cause.The Police and other road safety partners target vulnerable road users and motorcyclists fall into that category.D Macpherson noted an issue for motorcycles is uneven road surfaces at road works.There is a need for education campaigns around intersections toensure the safety of motorcyclists.Campaigns are scheduled over the Christmas period targeting speedand alcohol. After Christmas there will be a campaign focussing onvulnerable road users, including motorcyclists and scooters.The road between Raglan and Pukekohe (ex SH22) is an issue for thePolice together with SH25 and SH25a around the Coromandel.It was noted that there are some very good motorcyclists out on theroads, however there are very poor motorcyclists.There are some other locally based programmes working to try andbring down road fatalities.A Sanson noted the Waikato District Council endorses the work thatRoad Safety personnel do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.

Page 8
Report of Regional Transport Committee Meeting – 1 December 20088_____________________________________________ _____________________________________________There are increasing numbers of motorcycles and crashes in the regionparticularly in the Hauraki District and the Thames Coromandel District.Waikato had the highest cost of ACC claims nationally.There are increasing numbers of heavy motor vehicles and it is important to think about what effect the economic downturn will have on upward pressures on common offences. Should partner agencies reduce their education contribution, policewould be obligated to cover this function, reducing their own ability torespond to matters requiring enforcement.During discussion, questions and answers following the presentationthe Committee noted:L Tooman suggested that the Mayors, in conjunction with the Police,across the region could send letters to businesses advising them ofsome road safety initiatives they could have in place for their upcomingChristmas functions.A Catran noted signage is required for recreational motorcyclists in andaround the Coromandel Peninsula.RESOLVED THAT the report ‘Road Safety – A Police Perspective’(Doc # 1394136) dated 24 November 2008 be received for information.A Catran/A LivingstonCarried
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 9
Report of Regional Transport Committee Meeting – 1 December 20089_____________________________________________ _____________________________________________

[Tony]

Interesting point regarding accident rates vs actual numbers, yet another way statistics can be fudged. :)
I think you are being a bit dismissive of modern riding gear though - back in the day there wasn't really a lot of good gear to be had, leather jackets were an expensive luxury and even then rarely had any armour - if you were lucky there was a bit of padding that was good for bugger all in the event of a crash. Full face helmets were in their infancy, the normal riding gear for most was jeans and probably a jean jacket or something similar, and wet weather gear was PVC, yellow and bloody horrible in most cases!


Nicely put - but the safety gear only works if you are wearing it. Today (very hot and sunny) while riding I did a rough count and over 70% of the motorcylists I saw in west Auckland were riding with no safety gear other than a helmet. Thats no boots, no leathers or equivalent. About 50% were in shorts. This included real bikers on sports bikes and cruisers not just the normal scooter kids.

[oldrider]

And that's the problem - the powers that be aren't looking for "common ground". They're looking to change things by force.

I have to agree with you there Katman. :shifty: John.

[cs363]

Nicely put - but the safety gear only works if you are wearing it. Today (very hot and sunny) while riding I did a rough count and over 70% of the motorcylists I saw in west Auckland were riding with no safety gear other than a helmet. Thats no boots, no leathers or equivalent. About 50% were in shorts. This included real bikers on sports bikes and cruisers not just the normal scooter kids.


Yep, sad but true - it brings to mind the old Bell advert '$10 head? - $10 helmet!' I can't make my mind up whether those people are
a) Skilled, experienced motorcyclists who, knowing the risk have decided to ride as safely as possible being mindful of their vulnerability (doubtful)
b) People who place no value on their bodies/lives (see Bell ad above)
c) To quote Red from 'That 70's Show' - Dumbarses! (highly likely!)

Personally my minimum for any serious hot weather riding would be summer gloves, boots and good quality armoured textile gear with the thermal liner removed. Hey, if I was just going down to the dairy or round to a mate's it might be shoes with jeans, gloves and a jacket and I'd be taking it real easy!
But each to his own - I still can't get my head around people riding without helmets when I go to the US..... I don't even like open face helmets let alone none at all.

[JohnR]

Unfortunately any agency sponsored campaign, unless it's very cleverly spun, is going to increase the "non biking" public's negative perception of motorcycling.
I for one cannot see LTNZ, ACC et al coming up with anything other than "Motorcyclist (in various states of undress) speeds, crashes and dies"
Moral = motor cycles are dangerous, don't do it and don't let anyone you love or have influence over do it either.

[Tink]

bump, just curious was "target" meaning raise our ACC levies, or this is the spark that started the fire for ACC... or I could be completely wrong, but 1 year later, has anything improved.

[Ixion]

No, the ACC issue is just bean counter bastardliness. Police are actually supportive about ACC. This was just one of the moments they have every so often, so senior cop stays out in the sun too long and gets overexited.

[red mermaid]

No, the ACC issue is just bean counter bastardliness. Police are actually supportive about ACC. This was just one of the moments they have every so often, so senior cop stays out in the sun too long and gets overexited.

Another wild arse guess on your part, as it is clear you are not a member of the police, but you make so many pronouncements on what the police do, or don't do!

[Ixion]

Oh, well OK then. I stand corrected, the gentlewoman with the scales says that it WAS the cops that were behind us getting shafted by ACC. So, we can blame her, eh.


Though all the ones I've met in the various protests have been right behind us.

[red mermaid]

Another post which does nothing to correct your last wild arse guess, and you also said at post #77, "I cannot authoritatively comment on the 5kph worse than 80mcg thing, though it sounds total garbage.", and "What is this report you mention? Does it have an author? I'll write to them and blow them up. And demand authority for their other claim"

I believe the report was cited in post #80, but you have made no comment on your claims.

[caseye]

Another post which does nothing to correct your last wild arse guess, and you also said at post #77, "I cannot authoritatively comment on the 5kph worse than 80mcg thing, though it sounds total garbage.", and "What is this report you mention? Does it have an author? I'll write to them and blow them up. And demand authority for their other claim"

I believe the report was cited in post #80, but you have made no comment on your claims.

Hey some respect for one of the very few people here in KB land who has actually done pretty much all that they said they would and can speak from actual experience of their own! As the BRONZ leader for the Auckland arera and the man who helped the guys and gilrs in Welly get things organised to the point that over 7000 bikers converged on Welly in an orderly and civil fashion,f Ixion deserves at least a passing acknowledgement of his and BRONZ's achievements of late.
I know nothing of your background or profession but I'd venture quite safetly, to say that for sure your'e no Police officer, so your own opinion is as suspect as any others.
In case you didn't know it as BRONZ's spokesperson for quite somtime, it behoves Ixion to know many things.I'd be a littel less eager to jump at his throat if I was you.
I for one would be amongst the many who would rip your own out for such insolence!

[CookMySock]

I don't think that you would get done for the riding in the right wheel track, as the road code says, that is where you are meant to ride. ie the front of the car's driver's main vision.Once you get some pace on (open road), you have to swap from side to side, as its just too easy to clip a white line, or worse still, a catseye, usually with really scary or disasterous consequences.

Steve

[Mully]

I know nothing of your background or profession but I'd venture quite safetly, to say that for sure your'e no Police officer, so your own opinion is as suspect as any others.

Actually, with a name like "Red Mermaid", he could be CVIU....

[James Deuce]

Actually, with a name like "Red Mermaid", he could be CVIU....

Guarantee it. He certainly presents arrogantly enough to be one.

[yungatart]

Guarantee it. He certainly presents arrogantly enough to be one.

I think you are right on the button JD......I think he used to post on here under a different log on...nasty piece of works, he was.....

[SPman]

....
Moral = motor cycles are dangerous, don't do it and don't let anyone you love or have influence over do it either.
i.e. - the same view as the last 55 yrs.........

Once you get some pace on (open road), you have to swap from side to side, as its just too easy to clip a white line, or worse still, a catseye, usually with really scary or disasterous consequences.
........Que??????

[breakaway]

sorry bro..laws cant be "subjective"..

far as im concerned.. if someone pulls me up on a "subjective" law.. better be prepared for a long court fight

Unfortunately, most people don't have the money and/or time for a "long court fight".

[red mermaid]

Hey some respect for one of the very few people here in KB land who has actually done pretty much all that they said they would and can speak from actual experience of their own! As the BRONZ leader for the Auckland arera and the man who helped the guys and gilrs in Welly get things organised to the point that over 7000 bikers converged on Welly in an orderly and civil fashion,f Ixion deserves at least a passing acknowledgement of his and BRONZ's achievements of late.
I know nothing of your background or profession but I'd venture quite safetly, to say that for sure your'e no Police officer, so your own opinion is as suspect as any others.
In case you didn't know it as BRONZ's spokesperson for quite somtime, it behoves Ixion to know many things.I'd be a littel less eager to jump at his throat if I was you.
I for one would be amongst the many who would rip your own out for such insolence!

So because Ixion does a bit of organising it gives him the right to pronounce all he wants on the police, and from what he says, I know he knows bugger all about what he is talking about.

[bogan]

So because Ixion does a bit of organising it gives him the right to pronounce all he wants on the police, and from what he says, I know he knows bugger all about what he is talking about.

hey, why logically dispute something when you can just call the poster an idiot!

[James Deuce]

It's a well respected Internet forum technique that.

[caseye]

So because Ixion does a bit of organising (Oh boy you really don't know who you have insulted here do you?)
it gives him the right to pronounce all he wants on the police, and from what he says, I know he knows bugger all about what he is talking about.

Well come on then, instead of attacking the man try pointing out where he is wrong or at least where he may have said something not quite correct.
As for knowing what he's talking about, you seem to have missed my initial point.Ixion has for many years researched many things to do with motorcyclists govt depts etc, I'd be very surprised if he was far off the mark at all.
Come in here with an attitude the size of the one you exhibited earlier and you will get cut down to size, too many people here know and like Ixion had I not said something I'm sure another would have.

[The Stranger]

........Que??????

Pick me, pick me.

[yachtie10]

So because Ixion does a bit of organising it gives him the right to pronounce all he wants on the police, and from what he says, I know he knows bugger all about what he is talking about.

He has a right to say what he wants just as you do

to me you sound like a policeman who swallows the party line (maybe lack of intellect) and then gets aggressive with anyone who has a different opinion.

I dont agree with Ixion on everything but he has done a lot of work in finding out information and is probably better in formed than most

make your point on the issue not the man

[peasea]

He has a right to say what he wants just as you do

to me you sound like a policeman who swallows the party line (maybe lack of intellect) and then gets aggressive with anyone who has a different opinion.

It's part and parcel of the deal when you join the blue Mafia. It's their way or you get banged up. (If you get caught.) Don't, whatever you do, stick up for yourself or quote your rights to a copper, they get very angy, very quickly. What bullying traits they aren't born with can soon be drummed into them during training or shortly thereafter.

[scumdog]

It's part and parcel of the deal when you join the blue Mafia. It's their way or you get banged up. (If you get caught.) Don't, whatever you do, stick up for yourself or quote your rights to a copper, they get very angy, very quickly. What bullying traits they aren't born with can soon be drummed into them during training or shortly thereafter.

Ah, just dealing with the public on a daily basis will do all the above to anybody...

Even cops who start off as meek, mild and wanting to help everybody soon change after their dose of the public.

Of course I was nasty, suspicious and cynical right from the get-go, I by-passed all that "I'm Mr Nice and I'm here to help you" crap:nya:

[Pixie]

"You can't take too many risks. I've been cut off by bloody car drivers and they're friggin' females and the people using cellphones when they're driving and that's absolutely dangerous."

They definitely shouldn't be doing that in a moving car.

[Blackbird]

REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEEReport of the Regional Transport Committee of the Waikato Regional Council held inthe Council Chambers, Environment Waikato (Waikato Regional Council) office, 1 Dec 2008

Page 8
Report of Regional Transport Committee Meeting – 1 December 20088_____________________________________________ _____________________________________________There are increasing numbers of motorcycles and crashes in the regionparticularly in the Hauraki District and the Thames Coromandel District.Waikato had the highest cost of ACC claims nationally.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


There was a piece in a recent copy of the Peninsula Post about police targeting motorcyclists on the Coro Peninsula in direct response to complaints by the public about "excessive speed" by riders in 70 km/hr and 50 km/hr restricted areas. I don't know whether there's a correlation but I've noticed a lot more police cars on the Thames coast road parked up in the little villages with their radars switched on. I don't have any issue with riding fast and safely on the open road, but speeding in built up areas does not do us a great service. I totally agree with Katman's sentiments that often, we're our own worst enemies.

I just hope that the police also take centre-line crossers to task too. This summer on the Peninsula, centre line crossing by cars has been appallingly high.

Rant over.

[PrincessBandit]

Ah, just dealing with the public on a daily basis will do all the above to anybody...

Even cops who start off as meek, mild and wanting to help everybody soon change after their dose of the public.

Of course I was nasty, suspicious and cynical right from the get-go, I by-passed all that "I'm Mr Nice and I'm here to help you" crap:nya:

Roflmao - sentence one sounded just like me when I started out as a relief teacher many many years ago. Substitute the words "dose of the belligerent high school student" for "public" and you could be talking about a completely different profession!

[swbarnett]

I don't have any issue with riding fast and safely on the open road, but speeding in built up areas does not do us a great service.
The trouble is that most of those speeding in the built up areas on the Coromandel Penninsula will be Aucklanders. Here if you don't speed in built up areas you often get passed by all and sundry. Most people can't adjust to the local culture when they get out of Auckland.

[Blackbird]

The trouble is that most of those speeding in the built up areas on the Coromandel Penninsula will be Aucklanders. Here if you don't speed in built up areas you often get passed by all and sundry. Most people can't adjust to the local culture when they get out of Auckland.

Can't comment on that as I wouldn't have a clue but it does seem a piss poor reason. However, the other thing I've noticed that seems to be prevalent is that the worst excesses seem to happen when there are a whole bunch of riders (lemmings/sheep?) together. Another compelling reason for avoiding group rides?

[scumdog]

However, the other thing I've noticed that seems to be prevalent is that the worst excesses seem to happen when there are a whole bunch of riders (lemmings/sheep?) together. Another compelling reason for avoiding group rides?

Nah, just pick the group you ride with - if you know them well you'll know if they're OK in a group ride situation.

If they behave like dicks tell 'em just that.

[Blackbird]

Nah, just pick the group you ride with - if you know them well you'll know if they're OK in a group ride situation.

If they behave like dicks tell 'em just that.

Exactly. Riding with friends you trust implicitly isn't what I call "group rides". I've always assumed group rides are those which aren't restricted to people you either know or trust.

[swbarnett]

Can't comment on that as I wouldn't have a clue but it does seem a piss poor reason
Totally agree. All that is necessary is to recognise that you're not in your own home town and respect the local culture. There does seem to be a certain amount of the "I'm better because I'm from Auckland" attitude.

[scumdog]

Totally agree. All that is necessary is to recognise that you're not in your own home town and respect the local culture. There does seem to be a certain amount of the "I'm better because I'm from Auckland" attitude.

I try to balance it with an "I'm not from Auckland and feel sorry for those that are" attitude.:bleh::devil2:

[pritch]

I try to balance it with an "I'm not from Auckland and feel sorry for those that are" attitude.:bleh::devil2:

You and the rest of us south of the Bombays... :whistle:

[swbarnett]

I try to balance it with an "I'm not from Auckland and feel sorry for those that are" attitude.:bleh::devil2:


You and the rest of us south of the Bombays... :whistle:

:rofl: I here ya loud and clear.

I'm an Aucklander mainly for one reason - I was born here. Subsequent to that my wife was, until recently, was a student and lecturer at Auckland Uni. Also, the way my career's gone there's not much work south of the Bombays.

Auckland has it's compensations but I would move out if I could - far too crowded for my liking.