Speed and tolerance

[Akzle]

Red light runners, there's the problem.

See it every day and must be so easy to put a fixed camera in, but may be not enough revenue in it.

yeah this. These dicks fuck me right off.
I make a point of pointing. Laughing and clapping if the end up queued and impeeding traffic. Sometimes honk and wave for maximum embarasment to them.

Usually women in suvs.

[SMOKEU]

can you guys sell me some speed? My tolerance seems to have increased and I don't get the same oomph out of it than I used to.

I'm having a hard time getting hold of some too.

[george formby]

Usually women in suvs.

Could be trannies.
Or Georgina wots her chops. One step removed from a trannie.
Just sayin.

[george formby]

I'm having a hard time getting hold of some tool.

Crikey. Man on a mission.

[rastuscat]

Yep you're gonna have to explain to me again how endangering the lives of road users & increasing the risk of accidents is improving "safety"

Vodka.

Instead of bouncing esnails about how about we sit and have a beer and sort out our differences

[rastuscat]

Silly me.

I should never put speed and tolerance in a thread. Too much discussion with bugger all agreement.

It might interest some to hear that 3 years ago I wrote a paper on removing most comp stops, coz nobody stops anyway. I wanted them replaced with Give Ways. That we we could enforce the shit out of the remaining comp stops, the ones that need it, and the rest would be sorted out after the crashes happened. It got as far as the local council, who smiled and that was it.

The rationale behind comp stops is that people occasionally fail to see something before driving out in front of it. If someone stops, that gives them a greater chance to see the thing that is coming.

Now, I know that few will accept that they can fail to see something that is clearly visible, but it happens every day.

Because nobody thinks they are fallible, we fail to understand the stop sign rationale.

Just my few cents on it. Happy to spend hours outlining theory and practice on it, bloody pointless exercise that would be tho. It's not going to change.

[Berries]

My pet hate is people who don't stop at ComStops....if you targeted Shands Rd between Marshs and Selwyn you could fund the National Dept. I did a number of 'surveys' there just for personal reasons over a number of days and over 95% of people do not stop at the ComStop if they have a look and nothing is coming

95% would suggest the stop sign is BS, like many.

[Akzle]

Instead of bouncing esnails about how about we sit and have a beer and sort out our differences

id happily sit down and blase a fat cone with you. Then go for a skid on the bikes. You can put the disco on and we can fang it at 105 everywhere!

[MVnut]

True Rastus, not every ComStop needs to be one, but if they are then folk should stop. A lot of accidents in the stretch of road I mentioned, and many close calls.....the other day I saw a truck go left into Shands Rd from Selwyn Rd thru the Stop at maybe 20+k......no way he could have been sure if it was safe or not. Sure enough he missed (couldn't care less about) a black VW driving up Shands at 100k, very close call

[MVnut]

95% would suggest the stop sign is BS, like many.

In most of these intersections I mentioned....95% of people would be wrong !

[SMOKEU]

It might interest some to hear that 3 years ago I wrote a paper on removing most comp stops, coz nobody stops anyway.

I always come to a complete stop at stop signs, and look both ways, sometimes several times just to be on the safe side.

id happily sit down and blase a fat cone with you. Then go for a skid on the bikes. You can put the disco on and we can fang it at 105 everywhere!

It won't be a comfortable ride with handcuffs on in the back of a Commodore while your bike is on a tow truck.

[Berries]

The rationale behind comp stops is that people occasionally fail to see something before driving out in front of it. If someone stops, that gives them a greater chance to see the thing that is coming.

The rationale is that it should be a stop control only if certain visibility criteria are met. When they aren't you get people ignoring them. In the end it requires enforcement to get compliance but you still have a BS stop control and you cannot enforce the intersection 24 hours a day. Often put in as a cheap fix after a crash it doesn't really help in the long run, just lessens the impact of the 'true' stop controls.

I'd agree with what you proposed years ago. Give way actually means give way so there really is no need for stop controls anywhere.

In most of these intersections I mentioned....95% of people would be wrong !

Did they all crash?

[george formby]

The rationale is that it should be a stop control only if certain visibility criteria are met. When they aren't you get people ignoring them. In the end it requires enforcement to get compliance but you still have a BS stop control and you cannot enforce the intersection 24 hours a day. Often put in as a cheap fix after a crash it doesn't really help in the long run, just lessens the impact of the 'true' stop controls.

I'd agree with what you proposed years ago. Give way actually means give way so there really is no need for stop controls anywhere.


Did they all crash?

No stop controls? SMIDSY? Bit of a sweeping statement. But, yeah, nah, yeah. I fail to see the issue with "stop". It's not rocket science, yellow paint is more expensive and I can afford to spend an extra 4 or 5 seconds on my trip to make sure I get home in one piece if it's pointed out to me with signs & said yellow paint that the junction can be dangerous. Enforcement? Let common sense prevail.

[MVnut]

Did they all crash?

Grow up Berries, you are in Dunners, probably have no idea what intersections I'm referring to

[MVnut]

yellow paint is more expensive .

....yeah and an Ozzie company gets all our road marking contracts (some they subbie out of course), getting paid per metre (they even get paid to paint 'the gaps' what a rort