Come warm yourself by the fire
Originally Posted by chasio
How the fuck can he recommend taking out the corners???!!!!!!!!!
We are not represented we are fucked.
I hope I never come across this guy in real life, because I don't think I could stop smacking him in the face.
Reactor Online. Sensors Online. Weapons Online. All Systems Nominal.
on the up
Calm down mate. We're more than likely reading a reporter's interpretation of something Paul's said. "Road realignments" aren't necessarily corner straightening. It's more to do with camber, sightlines, changing the way a corner works in order to give greater visibility in an area where hills and trees may create a false impression.
There's actually some quite good science around the whole thing.
And I to my motorcycle parked like the soul of the junkyard. Restored, a bicycle fleshed with power, and tore off. Up Highway 106 continually drunk on the wind in my mouth. Wringing the handlebar for speed, wild to be wreckage forever.
- James Dickey, Cherrylog Road.
Come warm yourself by the fire
Fair enough.
However if I can misinterpret it.............who says the government knows what he is talking about.
If you can't say something clearly and concisely.......don't say it at all.
You have to remember how to think like the Government.....
"Motorbike are not being seen" = "Motorcyclists need to wear hi-viz"
"Taxes are too high" = "Income is too low"
"We have too much debt" = "Sell out state assets"
and
"Roads need to be realigned" = "Take the dangerous corners out of the road"
Reactor Online. Sensors Online. Weapons Online. All Systems Nominal.
Forum whore
Oh dear. The 18x more dangerous quote is actually an understatement according to MotoNZ - http://motonz.org.nz/join-the-debate/
Forum whore
One of the things I constantly contested.... no wonder they didn't like me
Just ride.
God's Evil Twin
We need the option to start picking which bike group our 30$ goes to I think
Science Is But An Organized System Of Ignorance"Pornography: The thing with billions of views that nobody watches" - WhiteManBehindADesk
Hardcore Biker
Just paid the rego for the Honda yesterday ($528). Thought that since I had received a little glossy flier for MOTO NZ, I'd have another look at their website and see what has been added. Discussion on need for reduced road toll/injuries and improved riding skills and behaviour - all very laudable and don't disagree on the need.
However, I wouldn't consider contributing feedback to MOTO NZ - not because I don't think safety is a priority (it is), but because it all feels like a distraction.
Why do I feel annoyed:
Scope of Debate
Target Group
Political Influence
Lack of Well-Packaged Data
1. Scope of Debate
The Crown has a unique power in being able to charge taxes and levies, but in doing so reserves the right to control the political debate. Read the MOTO NZ Terms of Reference, and it is all safety focused. Not wrong with that, except:
a. Why is the debate simply limited to safety ? Why is 'funding model' and 'equity of contribution' not up for debate as well ?
Think the Terms of Reference is more interesting for what it does not include.
2. Target Group
Why just focus on motorcyclists (and not on other cyclists as well, and on other "dangerous activities for that matter) when discussing safety - and contribution to funding ?
Seems like I'm being categorised as "dangerous" simply because I ride a motorcycle, and being unfairly penalised accordingly.
3. Political Influence
What degree of political influence does MOTO NZ think they'll achieve (as opposed to providing 'political cover 'or 'evidence of action' ). I'd feel much happier if the party receiving 'advice' was somehow compelled to take account ot it - and by this I mean the minister (and not ACC).
It would also be good if the minister involved (i) had some interest in motorcycling and its positive benefits (ii) saw safety as more a social imperative and less a cost saving exercise - instead of trying to privatise ACC as fast as possible.
4. Lack of Well Packaged Data
There may be parcels of data out in the public forum, but they don't necessarily appear readily visible or well packaged. By providing some more data in better form - with some decent analysis by (say) age / engine size / location / licence level - plus some commom metrics, maybe we could get past the current political situation where only one side seems to have the data and can control the debate.
The last parcel of structured data and comment I saw was that of Dr Lamb from Lincoln about 2 years ago. There may have been others since then, but have certainly not seen them.
Summary.
1. That the focus on safety (while important) is via a government funded and controlled channel (which shifts debate away from discussion on other important items such as funding)
2. That it gives support to the argument that motorcycling is inherently more dangerous than other pursuits, and to why levies should be correspondingly higher than for other groups.
3. That our politicans don't necessarily have increased safety as one of their primary imperatives.
4. That the lack of readily available and well structured data hinders debate - it would be nice to have a more level playing field.
Cheers
Have it large
God bless ya Mr Viking, where to begin?
[SIGPIC]
The instructions are simple...
Madame Guillotine would be a good place...
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
Forum whore
Well with the revelations about Slippery Nick and an ex National volunteer coming out of the mists, you never know......
Just ride.
on the up
Because the Terms of Reference were decided by the previous Minister of ACC. He did not want to include anything else.
Because there is no current way to tax them. The National Government does not want to be seen to be creating any new taxes unless they can find a way to single out a group and open them to derision by the general population.
None. MOTO NZ is designed from the start to be non-political. In fact they are not allowed to be.
Well-packaged data have a bad habit of making government-created organisations like MOTO-NZ look like the shams they are. MOTO-NZ have made a point of ignoring the good Doctor Lamb's research on many occasions. His data showed conclusively that the largest group by far having motorcycle accidets was 18-24 year olds on 250s.
And I to my motorcycle parked like the soul of the junkyard. Restored, a bicycle fleshed with power, and tore off. Up Highway 106 continually drunk on the wind in my mouth. Wringing the handlebar for speed, wild to be wreckage forever.
- James Dickey, Cherrylog Road.
Forum whore
Mate, that is one term they totally failed. Never met a more politically sensitive group in my life - no wonder I never fitted in
Just ride.
on the up
Indeed. I wonder if a wee call to RNZ wouldn't be out of line now, given the last day's news. just saying...Mate, that is one term they totally failed. Never met a more politically sensitive group in my life - no wonder I never fitted in
And I to my motorcycle parked like the soul of the junkyard. Restored, a bicycle fleshed with power, and tore off. Up Highway 106 continually drunk on the wind in my mouth. Wringing the handlebar for speed, wild to be wreckage forever.
- James Dickey, Cherrylog Road.
Hardcore Biker
Not true - MotoNZ has copies of all of Lambs motorcycle research and they have also had a lengthy presentation from him. From all accounts it was very informative...
Coal Burning XV Rider!
You know this how? and if it happened do you believe that any of those sitting on the MOTO board have in any way been swayed?
Most in these threads have actually attempted to change things, have you?
Every day above ground is a good day!:
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks