Speeding tickets. Why the angst?

**wysper** · 5th September 2011, 19:58

Originally Posted by Scuba_Steve

But If I want to take the chance on killing my self why shouldn't I be allowed???

Because we all pay when you fail, bloody expensive to put a body back together again.

And then there are the innocents you might just take out while you are taking the chance on killing your self.

**FJRider** · 5th September 2011, 19:58

Originally Posted by bogan

But the odds are not fixed to that arbitrary number, the odds change with both speed and conditions, most motorists understand this on some level (though for some it's buried pretty deep). The angst can come because the motorist feels their driving in those conditions was as safe or safer than driving at the limit for other conditions.

So many things "affect the odds" ... and on any given day, you may not be even aware on what those conditions are/could be ...

I find it amazing how many drunks and idiots think their driving is safe ... but are dead wrong ...

**ducatilover** · 5th September 2011, 20:02

This is no way near as funny as I expected.

**rastuscat** · 5th September 2011, 20:02

Originally Posted by Scuba_Steve

Yea I'm not a fan of them either, Your gang just doesn't seem to try that as much.

But If I want to take the chance on killing my self why shouldn't I be allowed???
In the van where I don't like to wear them cause I'm fucked anyways in an accident, I have to. Yet in the Landy where the other persons fucked & I would wear one I'm not allowed, it's illegal for me to wear it. Fucking retarded rules we have round here... But back on topic ay

Yo Skoober Steve.

I'd support seatbelts being a personal choice thing BUT ONLY IF the ambulance that picks you up was paid for only by you, the plastic surgeon was paid for only by you, blah blah blah. You get the drift.

Are there ANY tickets that aren't just revenue collecting, quota catching, money grubbing, tax collecting gubbermint instruments?

**HenryDorsetCase** · 5th September 2011, 20:06

I dont care about velocity tax. Demerit points piss me off.

**Usarka** · 5th September 2011, 20:10

Originally Posted by DrunkenMistake

Im only a young fella ill be honest, but even I can see its clear,
People of all ages, sizes and color in this society can NOT accept responsibility for their own actions, its a real shame.

Exactly!

People become cops and then whinge because people don't like being ticketed? What's with that....?

**Scuba_Steve** · 5th September 2011, 20:12

Originally Posted by wysper

Because we all pay when you fail, bloody expensive to put a body back together again.

And then there are the innocents you might just take out while you are taking the chance on killing your self.

Originally Posted by rastuscat

Yo Skoober Steve.

I'd support seatbelts being a personal choice thing BUT ONLY IF the ambulance that picks you up was paid for only by you, the plastic surgeon was paid for only by you, blah blah blah. You get the drift.

Then shouldn't we also give up the bikes??? or be under under those same "pay for your own ambulance"??? we're just as fucked on them if not more-so.

Originally Posted by rastuscat

Are there ANY tickets that aren't just revenue collecting, quota catching, money grubbing, tax collecting gubbermint instruments?

Yes drink driving for one, impeding the flow of traffic, failing to keep left, dangerous driving...
it'd just be easier to list the

laws/tickets

**sidecar bob** · 5th September 2011, 20:27

Its easy to ticket people for speeding, you aim a machine at them & it immediatly tells if they are breaking the law or not. A no brainer really.
Surely a machine that can gauge the stupidity of a motorist rather than the speed simply by pointing it at them would be a better gadget wouldnt it??

**rastuscat** · 5th September 2011, 20:34

Originally Posted by sidecar bob

Surely a machine that can gauge the stupidity of a motorist rather than the speed simply by pointing it at them would be a better gadget wouldnt it??

It's already been invented. It's an Isuzu Piazza. Owning one was conclusive proof of stupidity.

**SPman** · 5th September 2011, 20:46

Probably because of the politically dictated, pedantic application, of the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law......which then polarises the population.......

"Laws - put there for the guidance of wise men and the slavish obedience of fools!".......someone or other.....

**Jay GTI** · 5th September 2011, 20:49

For me it's because speeding is unavoidable. There isn't a person on this planet who hasn't sped at some point, or in fact speeds on a regular basis.

I'm not talking about Mr WRX who thinks the roads are his personal racetrack, I'm talking about Mr Average, who doesn't quite drop down to the speed limit before he passes the 50 sign after he leaves the 70 zone. The guy who lets the speed creep up slightly on an open, clear road, before glancing down at the speedo and re-correcting. Who doesn't coast down hills with one foot on the brake and one eye on the speedo, just in case he's gone over the limit. He is just a normal driver, he does what we all do, but he is liable for a penalty for each and every one of the above scenarios. It's part of driving, it's natural, it happens day in, day out by almost every driver on the road, without consequence. But it is still, by the letter of the law, illegal.

Why don't people feel the same about seatbelt tickets? Well my seatbelt goes on when I get in the car, it comes off just before I get out. It doesn't slip off when I'm not quite paying attention. It doesn't slightly pop out when I'm driving along a clear road in good light with no other traffic around. It's either on and I won't get ticketed or it's not and I am quite obviously cruising for that ticket. I can slap on the seatbelt when I get into the car and not put another seconds thought into that seatbelt until I turn off the ignition at the end of my journey. The results of wearing a seatbelt or not are quite obvious too. I crash at a reasonable pace with one on, I might have a bit of difficultly breathing for a while. Crash at the same speed without one and emergency services get to scrape bits of me off the dashboard.

Revenue collecting or not, quota or otherwise, of course being penalised for 106kph or 110pkh* on a clear, open road that just happens to be on Easter Monday is going to provoke emotive reactions. I can, to the very best of my ability, try to drive to the speed limit every single time I get into my car, but I know that because of the physical nature of what I am doing and the fact that I know I cannot humanly concentrate on my speed 100% of the time, I will break the law every single time I get into my car. And if there's a cop with a speed camera, hiding behind some trees around a blind bend at the bottom of a hill, who pings me for doing 6-10kph over the limit, he has done so because I have done something that is illegal. Whether or not I have done something dangerous, that is irrelevant, but broken the law? Yup. So if that happens and it pushes me a step closer to a State-sponsored walking holiday, and the best that the cop can come up with is "because it's illegal", is it really surprising I'd feel a little hard done by?

For the record, I do know there are flaws in my reasoning and I do understand lowest common denominator and trying to change the ingrained attitudes of kiwi drivers (by and large, awful) and all that other waffle, but I'm just stating why I see it as a ticket that gets the reaction it does.

*if someone can provide me with information about how much increase in risk of injury and death there is travelling at 100kph and 110kph, please let me know, I am seriously curious.

**Jay GTI** · 5th September 2011, 20:53

Originally Posted by rastuscat

It's already been invented. It's an Isuzu Piazza. Owning one was conclusive proof of stupidity.

Ah shit, I've owned one of them and sadly I agree. Please ignore my previous post...

**Lateralus** · 5th September 2011, 21:26

Originally Posted by Jay GTI

if someone can provide me with information about how much increase in risk of injury and death there is travelling at 100kph and 110kph, please let me know, I am seriously curious.

From http://www.tacsafety.com.au/jsp/cont...ull&pageID=169

the risk of involvement in a casualty crash doubles with each 5km/h increase in free travelling speed above 60km/h, and a 5km/h reduction in speed can result in a decrease of at least 15% in the number of crashes.

**Jantar** · 5th September 2011, 21:28

Originally Posted by rastuscat

.... Why so much grief about it?

.

OK, I'll assume this is a genuine question and not a wind up.

Almost all traffic enforcement in New Zealand is aimed at road safety. The speed limit rule is the major exception to this. It is an arbitary figure, plucked out of the air and its sole basis is on the effect of accidents at speeds in excess of the limit. It doesn't consider the accident causes which are usually not related to exceeding the speed limit, but rather at too fast for the conditions.

In those countries where the speed limit has been raised, the accident rate has usually dropped. Similarly in places that have lowered the speed limit (like Australia NT) the accident rate increased. I have posted links to back up these claims on previous threads about the speed limit. I know the counter argument about allowing everyone to chose their own speed, but that just doesn't happen. In those USA states where the double nickel (55 mph) speed limit was raised, the average speed that traffic travelled at was only increased very slightly, not by as much as the increase in the limit. This shows that drivers, given the opportunity, WILL exercise some skill at reading the conditions and driving appropriately.

Yes, there will still be some who will use the road as their personal racetrack, but are probably doing that already. The police still have option of charges such as: driving at a speed such that they would be unable to stop in the clear visible distance ahead; careless driving; dangerous driving; etc. So those who are just outright dangerous can still be ticketed.

Research that I have read shows that drivers who are permitted to drive according to the conditions (road, traffic, vehicle, personal) are less likely to be drowsy, bored or sleepy, and are overall safer drivers.

Then comes the policing aspect of it. I'm sure you've issued tickets where the driver is incredulous at the speed you quote him, just as there are others who will 'fess up and admit to the speed. You've also met those who will lie, cheat and do everything possible to get you to not write out a ticket. Unfortunately there are a few in the force (I've named one to SD and another senior police officer) who will also lie, cheat and do everything possible to keep their ticket number up.

One local officer has been known in the past to stop a vehicle early in the day and lock a speed of around 116 kmh or thereabouts. Then he would stop motorcycles, sports cars or anyone who looked like they may be able to speed and ask them how fast they were going. if they admitted to being over the speed limit and name a speed then he would accept their stated speed and write the ticket. If they disputed speeding he would show the speed locked on the radar and write out the ticket for that speed (or close to it). There is nothing on the radar that shows the time or location that the speed was locked.

Hence the whole thing about speeding tickets is a "he said, she said" situation that involves an arbitrary limit with no actual evidence of an offence being required.

Does that explain the grief?