111 system report

[Lou Girardin]

So all those 'warnings' got nowhere, never got throught to you??

I guess a couple of tickets after the first warning might have made the difference, I rest my case.

The gov't doesn't really care about YOU if you're dumb enough not to wear a helmet and split your silly skull, all they care about is the enormous amount of money it will cost to keep you alive and/or rehabilitate you back into the work (tax-paying) force. (i.e. Like the head injuries on that troublesome girl on TV last night that was involved in a dumb-arsed speed related crash that killed the driver and left her not only a a vege but a pregnant one who has now given birth to a fatherless child - how much do you think that little episode cost the country - both emotionally and financially?? - THAT'S what the Govt care about)

If they REALLY cared they'd spend money on proven safety measures, not lame adverts.
BTW breath/blood alcohol testing does infringe your right against self-incrimination. That's been forgotten though hasn't it?
And I can't help thinking that the cops must have more sophisticated surveillance techniques than cellphones and text messages.

[Ixion]

I'm trying to goad a comment as to why EBA (not necessarily checkpoints) is not seen as 'infringing rights' of those that think they were doing nothing wrong when they got pulled over and picked up for EBA. (AND also why, given the amount of money collected from each person convicted, it is NOT seen as revenue gathering)
Re your other comment, see (1)(2)&(3) on my post earlier, - AND my earlier comments on txting between those at wanking ('street racing'), VERY hard to beat. (Chopper might help but generally they have 'outposts' that txt the alarm on impending police arrival.)

The reason is that the level set for EBA is in general seen to be reasonable . If the level was set at say 50 instead of the present 400 (or whatever the numbers are, that ratio, a level where one drink hours ago could put you over) then people would complain.

Rightly or wrongly people don't perceive that 61kph in a 50 zone is necessarily dangerous. If the police only mounted speed camera ops in known dangerous areas, by schools etc then there would be less opposition.

And it is very easy to exceed the speed limit quite accidentally. How many of us have glanced at the speedo and thought "Shit, I'm way over the limit". It's harder to accidentally get drunk.

[Lou Girardin]

And it is very easy to exceed the speed limit quite accidentally. How many of us have glanced at the speedo and thought "Shit, I'm way over the limit". It's harder to accidentally get drunk.

I ALWAYS 'accidentally' get drunk. Never mean to, it's that fatal roader that does it.

[Ixion]

I ALWAYS 'accidentally' get drunk. Never mean to, it's that fatal roader that does it.

Well I never actually *intend* to either !. But it's kind of hard to drink a bevvy without realising it. I'd have a lot more sympathy myself with someone who said "I didn't realise I was doing 61, it was downhill and I didn't notice" than someone who said "I never realised I was drinking so much".

Personally I've found that normal social drinking/drinks with dinner you pass the testing thing OK. You'd have to be knocking it back hard to fail.

Probably should note that I never drink when I'm going out on the bike. First thing affected by grog is balance !

[scumdog]

If they REALLY cared they'd spend money on proven safety measures, not lame adverts.
BTW breath/blood alcohol testing does infringe your right against self-incrimination. That's been forgotten though hasn't it?
And I can't help thinking that the cops must have more sophisticated surveillance techniques than cellphones and text messages.

It's the old 'action beats reaction' thing Lou, with scanners, guys on outposts and cell-phones etc it makes thing just a tad tricky to be there and nail 'em.

And what 'proven safety measure' would have prevented the tragedy I mentioned about six posts ago?

[Paul in NZ]

If they REALLY cared they'd spend money on proven safety measures, not lame adverts.
BTW breath/blood alcohol testing does infringe your right against self-incrimination. That's been forgotten though hasn't it?
And I can't help thinking that the cops must have more sophisticated surveillance techniques than cellphones and text messages.

Mate I can physically show you some surveillance gear that would freak you out but who can afford it and do you really want the govt putting this stuff up? Besides, unless you park a milsat over the country everything is detectable eventually.. It just can't be done on a sensible budget.

Besides.. Where would the Police get the resources to totally surround, arrest and process a group that big? The boy racers know that, thats why they do what they do in groups...

If you don't like it, perhaps you could pressure your MP to get the army to lend a hand as they do have enough resource... However we are then setting a pretty dangerous precedent..

Neh! People will always be idiots and bigger idiots in bigger groups...

Cheers

[Lou Girardin]

It's the old 'action beats reaction' thing Lou, with scanners, guys on outposts and cell-phones etc it makes thing just a tad tricky to be there and nail 'em.

And what 'proven safety measure' would have prevented the tragedy I mentioned about six posts ago?

C'mon now, you'll never stop all fatals, you know that. Better mental health care might have stopped it, although even all the 'revenue collectors' on SH1 didn't. But look at the fall in fatals when they put barriers down the M/ways and that was after the MOW said they were too expensive for their perceived benefit.

[scumdog]

C'mon now, you'll never stop all fatals, you know that. Better mental health care might have stopped it, although even all the 'revenue collectors' on SH1 didn't. But look at the fall in fatals when they put barriers down the M/ways and that was after the MOW said they were too expensive for their perceived benefit.

Just shows how bad "I'm an above average driver" Mr Joe Bloggs really is, too dumb to focus on the repercussions of crossing the centreline!!

How do you guage how effective policing the roads really is? - I suppose taking ALL police off the roads for a week would do it, just watch the toll rise then.!

Until they find a better way it'll just have to be 'revenue gathering' as usual, nobody in any country has found a less expesive/more effective way of keeping a lid on the (generally) unnecessary road-toll.


Education and a more difficult test with a higher learning to drive age could be better but then the "Too Hard" bleaters would be in on the act.

[Indoo]

As for the boy-racer thing, why aren't operations mounted to target these creeps? Things like blocking both ends of the road they're on after a period of surveillance to identify the main offenders and turning over all the shitboxes caught in the trap.

That happens here in Auckland a few times, the problem is the sheer amount of Police who have to be taken off frontline duties to do it. Sometimes you have up top 400 cars attending the illegals, often these cars have 3-4 idiots in the back so your usually looking at over a 1000 people. Theres a decent amount of troublemakers who usually attend and love nothing more than to bottle the Police. So you really need in excess of 20 or so cops to be rostered on it which in Auckland is like trying to draw blood outa a stone.

But it has happened and im sure will happen alot more in the future after last weekend.

[Lou Girardin]

How do you guage how effective policing the roads really is? - I suppose taking ALL police off the roads for a week would do it, just watch the toll rise then.!
Education and a more difficult test with a higher learning to drive age could be better but then the "Too Hard" bleaters would be in on the act.

One of the complaints from the AA and others was the lack of visible enforcement after the Police/MOT merger until '99. But the road toll fell more in that period than it has since. That's a small guide.
Anyway, the issue is more complex than how many cops are on the road.
Enforcement is getting tougher all the time, but the toll is not dropping as much as one would expect, according to LTNZ it should be consistantly under 400 now.
The bleaters would be the 'too expensive, lose too many votes" type.

[marty]

[QUOTE=Paul in NZ]It's a bit like saying the "Wiararapa is a know spot where motorcyclists break the law". While that is a true statement it's also a little harder stopping this behaviour than just know roughly where people are.

QUOTE]

or , "sh1 meremere is a spot where many people have died in fatals" maybe the police should patrol that area. oh hang on, they were. but it was quiet. so they should have been at tamaki. but then that would have been quiet. so they should have been at portage rd, but then tamaki woudl be busy. and someone may have crashed at meremere - and where were the cops? drinking coffee on the roadside at tamaki waiting for the boy racers to turn up and do burnouts probably.

more than likely the cops were dodging machetes and knives in domestics in south auckland, or attending sudden deaths, or stuck in the watchhouse.

[marty]

That happens here in Auckland a few times, the problem is the sheer amount of Police who have to be taken off frontline duties to do it. Sometimes you have up top 400 cars attending the illegals, often these cars have 3-4 idiots in the back so your usually looking at over a 1000 people. Theres a decent amount of troublemakers who usually attend and love nothing more than to bottle the Police. So you really need in excess of 20 or so cops to be rostered on it which in Auckland is like trying to draw blood outa a stone.

But it has happened and im sure will happen alot more in the future after last weekend.

a road block is a significant issue, you need to read the legislation before simply blocking the road.

[Lou Girardin]

a road block is a significant issue, you need to read the legislation before simply blocking the road.

If they can have a hikoi on the Harbour Bridge, they can block a road. Just takes the will to do it.
But, having said that, it's easier to pass stupid legislation (boy racer law) than actually do something constructive.

[spudchucka]

only %2 in given to the police by the govt?
thats why we always see them dishes out tickets. revenue collecting?
to make up for what the govt won't give out.
got to make money somewhere.

Regardless of what the ticket revenue is the police are still funded the same amount. Ticket revenue is not returned to the police just the same as petrol tax isn't put back into the roads. Instead we have a world leading social welfare system, even though we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the developed world..... Go Figure!

[spudchucka]

That was pure revenue collecting... whilst the previous night no police were at a known boy racer spot. OK... would the police here please explain the logic behind this apparent misuse of resources.

Do you go fishing?

Do you ever catch ALL the fish?

If the cops are at the same place every day and night, (a known boy racer spot for instance) how often do you think they would catch an offender? What do you think the boy racers reaction to the polcie presence would be?

How many police do you think there are? How do you reasonably expect them to be everywhere that YOU think they should be?

How do you know that the section of roadworks wasn't the subject of several speed related traffic incidents? Did the police receive complaints from the roading contractors due to them feeling unsafe as a result of idiot drivers? Did the police receive complaints from the public relating to this also? If they did then was the action taken appropriate? Were they serving the needs and wishes of their public by policing that section of road at that time?

Can you answer any of these question? If you can then you can answer your own question too.