Police saving our lives again

[Swoop]

Amazing.
The AA said something sensible for once.

Automobile Association spokesman Mike Noon called on the police to use their discretion "and truly focus on dangerous driving" rather than fine drivers for exceeding the 4km/h allowance by small margins on good roads.

Very rare for them to get away from the "speed kills" propaganda bullshit.

[scumdog]

Amazing.
The AA said something sensible for once.

Automobile Association spokesman Mike Noon called on the police to use their discretion "and truly focus on dangerous driving" rather than fine drivers for exceeding the 4km/h allowance by small margins on good roads.

Very rare for them to get away from the "speed kills" propaganda bullshit.

I'm privy to a lot of similar info, stuff that indicates not a total focus on speed, targetting those that thoughtlessly cross the centre-line etc.

But I wasn't going to say anything as I love laughing at the antics of the KB ranters....

[Scuba_Steve]

Amazing.
The AA said something sensible for once.

Automobile Association spokesman Mike Noon called on the police to use their discretion "and truly focus on dangerous driving" rather than fine drivers for exceeding the 4km/h allowance by small margins on good roads.

Very rare for them to get away from the "speed kills" propaganda bullshit.

Yep I've always thought we need to drop the "Speeding" fines & have only the "dangerous driving" charge, this way regardless of speed if you can't drive you get charged & it frees the PIG's up to get back to their jobs as police instead of scam operators for the Govt, leave the scams to the Nigerians!

[scumdog]

it frees the PIG's up to get back to their jobs as police instead of scam operators for the Govt, leave the scams to the Nigerians!

Scams only get results from losers and drongos....

[Scuba_Steve]

Scams only get results from losers and drongos....

Well we know what you think of NZ motorists...

[scumdog]

Well we know what you think of NZ motorists...

Really??

What DO I think of NZ motorists?


And who are 'we'??

[shrub]

If we see a zero road toll, then the big risk is that Our Noble Constabulary will be forced to have a zero tolerance, or our beloved masters will reduce the open road speed limit. And that means we will logically see the road toll dropping below zero, which means the dead will rise from their graves!!!!!

[shrub]

What DO I think of NZ motorists?

Do you think?

[scumdog]

Do you think?

Hell no!
It's apparently not needed on KB....

[Rych]

What's the problem with this if it works? Wasn't the last like lowest death toll in 50 years? If lives are saved it's worth it.

[trailblazer]

What's the problem with this if it works? Wasn't the last like lowest death toll in 50 years? If lives are saved it's worth it.

totally agree. If it works then whats the problem.

[Scuba_Steve]

totally agree. If it works then whats the problem.

that is the problem it doesn't work. So admittedly this is from the UK (its hard to pull info from NZ) but here is some abstracts

Figures made available show an impressive 35% decrease in deaths from 1978 to 1988. The spiraling number of deaths continued to decrease during the pre speed camera years until cameras were introduced in the early to mid 1990's. In fact, since the mid 1990's the number of deaths has stayed about the same which is proof, over a 10 year period, that speed cameras do not save lives. If planting 5000 cameras on the streets and issuing over 7 million fines since 1992 really worked then we would have seen the number of road deaths continue to fall, but they've just stayed the same. The question is, why haven't fatalities continued to decrease since cameras were introduced?
The finger of blame is clearly pointing at the cameras and those who support them. If it weren't for advances in vehicle safety design and medical treatment then casualties would have increased considerably since cameras were introduced.
Less than 4% of accidents are caused by exceeding the speed limit according to new data (page 41) published by the Department of Transport. This destroys the government's claim that 1/3 of accidents are speed related.

Between 1980 and 1995 UK road death rates were falling 7.1 per cent a year. But since speed cameras arrived, deaths have fallen just 2.8 per cent annually. Experts say that if the pre-1995 rate had continued 9,674 lives could have been saved.

The UK Department for Transport funded, then suppressed, a study that shows a 55 percent increase in injury accidents when speed cameras are used on highway work zones and a 31 percent increase when used on freeways without construction projects. According to the Transport Research Laboratory, the "non-works [personal injury accident] rate is significantly higher for the sites with speed cameras than the rate for sites without."

[trailblazer]

they have to do something or it could be you or I coming round a bend with a inpatient driver on the wrong side of the road while he tries to pass the old git towing a caravan. I guess you could look at it as the police arnt there to give you a big fine for speeding but there so if they can stop some speeders then they may be able to avoid having to tell some poor family that there husband,son,brother,uncle or friend has been envolved in a tragic accidant and have lost there life. If there is a chance to avoid that don't you think it is worth it.

[Scuba_Steve]

they have to do something or it could be you or I coming round a bend with a inpatient driver on the wrong side of the road while he tries to pass the old git towing a caravan. I guess you could look at it as the police arnt there to give you a big fine for speeding but there so if they can stop some speeders then they may be able to avoid having to tell some poor family that there husband,son,brother,uncle or friend has been envolved in a tragic accidant and have lost there life. If there is a chance to avoid that don't you think it is worth it.

yes they should do something... against the old git towing a caravan, let the people pass.
It was pointed out by the AA if that caravan is going 80km/h & the driver goes to overtake (obeying the speed limit 100km/h) it'll take him 20sec's to do so that is one hell of a long time or about 556m providing all things remain equal and if he does it on the opposite side of road you also have to add 100m clear space ahead to the distance taking the total distance to about 656m, THAT right there is dangerous!

[trailblazer]

I agree with you there and I would also speed up to pass but won't continue to accelerate or drive dangerously when I get passed. Im no saint as I have had my fair share of speeding fines and boy racer fines but I have also lost some good mates to people driving dangerously with speed and inattention so know what being on the recieving end of those horrible visits or phone calls by the police or friends is like and hope to never have my family go through that because I have been taken out by one of those drivers.