Another fee in our rego

[kiwi cowboy]

Another one from central Otago who doesn't seem to get what is being said, must all that interbreeding and banjo playing turning your brains to mush

At no point have I said good gear doesn't protect you, although it didn't stop me from breaking my wrist, ankle and arm in separate incidents

Just for the record im not a inbred banjoe playing mushbrain i was bred in canterburybut im not one eyed ether .

As for the breaks how much worse would it have been without the gear on???.

Its loke saying i dont need a seatbelt cos i dont intend to crash.

[Skiwi]

But the fact that someone is riding with no clothes on does not make them any more likely to crash in the first place. That is the issue, all these people are banging on about how ACC is going up due to the number of people crashing who aren't wearing all the approved gear yet where is the evidence?

Hmm, ok, so if we are talking soley about BEFORE a crash that's a little harder to explain, and I have no evidence, but in the interests of stirring few brain cells around I'll have a crack.

Let's take our jandle and Tshirt wearing rider, he is more exposed to infuences that may cause an accident. Examples would be:

1 Impacts from various fauna and flora are amplified increasing the distraction factor.
2 Jandles have a lower slip coefficient to a riders foot and therefore less control when weight on the pegs is required.
3 In cold weather he will have lower core body temperature, leading to increased risk of hypothermia which in turn dulls the wits
4. He is less visible than a rider in hi vis

I'm sure there's more, but cut me some slack it's early the morning after the night before

[Skiwi]

Just for the record im not a inbred banjoe playing mushbrain i was bred in canterburybut im not one eyed ether .
.

Damn, I thought we had closed our borders to you Northerners?, can't have our gene pool getting diluted

[kiwi cowboy]

Damn, I thought we had closed our borders to you Northerners?, can't have our gene pool getting diluted

Na i sneeked through wearing full riding gear WITH a full face helmit WITH a very dark tinted visor so you couldnt see my eye patch sneeky basterd A

[Usarka]

Its loke saying i dont need a seatbelt cos i dont intend to crash.

Seatbelts cause a lot of serious internal injuries, and probably increase the amount of ACC payouts.

I spent 3 weeks in hospital and about 12 weeks on ACC thanks to a seatbelt injury.

[dangerous]

Seatbelts cause a lot of serious internal injuries, and probably increase the amount of ACC payouts.

I spent 3 weeks in hospital and about 12 weeks on ACC thanks to a seatbelt injury.

half of you lot are just being delitrat dicks... you mate with out ya belt would proberly have ya brains mashed in to the dash... get relilistic here people.

I stand corrected ...

And I HAVE seen jandle/shorts wearing riders prang, and walk away unscathed ...

And I have seen bikini wearing scooter rider loose all skin and tits to the degree of little blood just white meat, her repair bill was nothing to the mental bill, she never recovered.
IMO people wearing so little should not be intitled to acc what I do my best yet still have to pay for them.

But is it an extra fee ... on top of the existing fee. OR ... is it included (taken from) in the existing fee ... ???

I dont think the total fee has changed any ...

extra, cant be more clear than my bill, attached, what other rego has two acc levies?

[mossy1200]

I like the way you have to pay tax on a bill to a government department.GST on my tax please."Sure Mossy.For you we have a special running.15% prompt payment increase"

[Berries]

IMO people wearing so little should not be intitled to acc what I do my best yet still have to pay for them.

What pisses me off is I do my best not to crash yet I still have pay for all the people who do so while wearing all the gear.


The way I see it is this.
The people who only wear some of the gear either don’t understand the consequences or have gone through their own risk assessment and decided that what they are wearing is suitable for the trip they are on.

The people who wear all the gear have also gone through their own risk assessment and decided that what they are wearing is suitable for the trip they are doing. Fair enough. I do wonder however how many of these ATGATT preachers who want to impose their standards on others actually really do a full risk assessment. You could say that ATGATT is a fatalistic approach in that the risk of a crash has been overestimated, for a whole variety of reasons.

I have said it before but will say it again. The obvious final bit of gear if you are getting dressed up with the high probability of crashing is to put a cage around you. Now you don’t do you? You have assessed the risk of riding a bike and are happy to accept it. So has everyone else on two wheels. Can’t you just let them ride?

[mossy1200]

I think what you will find is people are more against the choices that some make.Not so much the jeans and jackets and shoes in town.But the lack of gear on a higher speed trip out of town.Its not that we dont trust your approach to making a wise choice but the approach of the few that clearly cant make a wise choice.
Jandals in my opinion is a good choice of footwear for the beach or a walk but not so great for a ride on your bike.
The issue is that if some cant make good choices we might all be told what to wear.If we were ALL a bit wiser we wouldnt stand out.(by all I mean the few that cant think about what they are doing)
Everyone agrees not falling off is the first step.But nobody goes out with the intention of crashing.Shit happens.It may be inexperience,bad luck,road conditions,bird or stock or cage that causes it but it can happen to anyone at any time.I dont want to be told what to wear or how to ride but some people could be better off if they are told.

Is it possible that people that people that dont make a wise choice before they ride also dont make wise choices while they ride in some cases?

[Fast Eddie]

yawn..

what about freedom. what about liberty.

scrap ACC, scrap public health - you pay for your own health insurance, u fuck up, u pay.. if u cant pay.. ur fucked..

doesnt cost the govt or anyone else anything.. bingo.

muppets

p.s. nothing better than on a near 30 degree day to get on the bike in ya jandals and shorts with ya mrs in her skimpy bikini on the back and go for a gentle idle down to the beach.. you take that away from me and I'll kill ya - I'll KILL YA !

[Usarka]

half of you lot are just being delitrat dicks... you mate with out ya belt would proberly have ya brains mashed in to the dash... get relilistic here people.

Exactly, it would have cost ACC shitloads less.

[zeocen]

extra, cant be more clear than my bill, attached, what other rego has two acc levies?

Got mine in the mail yesterday and also noticed this :I
Would there be harm in a "no claim to ACC within x months/years" bonus? Although I guess you'd have to get into at-fault ACC claims and all that... would be nice though, I'd have a huge bonus taken off!

[FJRider]

extra, cant be more clear than my bill, attached, what other rego has two acc levies?

Considering that hasn't changed for over a YEAR ...

Have you only just noticed ... ???

[Fast Eddie]

hehe..

http://bikerpunks.com/mediaviewer/36...a-wheelie.html

[Skiwi]

yawn..

what about freedom. what about liberty.

scrap ACC, scrap public health - you pay for your own health insurance, u fuck up, u pay.. if u cant pay.. ur fucked..

doesnt cost the govt or anyone else anything.. bingo.

!

Great idea,since it seems to working so well in the good ole USA...........