Police getting tougher on speed tolerance

[rastuscat]

But we'll leave that for another day

Thank heavens for that.

[blue rider]

Always interesting to hear the views of those who have no idea what they are talking about.

my dairy got robbed at 8:20 in the morning and the police showed up after we called them and gave them the video tapes and the rego and make and model of the get a way car. donut time man.

my neighbour offered me a beating for telling him to not go ride with his helmet less and half naked kid.

i have only once seen cops in my neighbourhood in a year and a half and that was after the dairy got robbed.

go hang out on some highway and earn your living.

[blue rider]

If the law maker has the authority and responsibility to make a law, they also have the same to enforce that law. If you choose to break that law, for whatever reason you want to use, you accept that it is your fault if you receive the stated punishment.

Because everyone has their own personal opinions and preferences, the law cannot please everyone. It cannot take into account everyone's preferences and will always be a compromise solution. That's life in a society, like it or not.

and then you have to realise that everything that was done in germany between 1933 - 1945 was legal and you might want to think about this comment again.

a lawmaker makes laws, but we as people might want to think about a. is it moral and ethical (and yeah moral and ethical is something that might want to be discussed further) and b. enforceable - do we need to employ a few more hundred donuts eaters that are essentially civilian losers to write tickets? , c. to the betterment of the community (is it good to throw someone in prison for years on end for a bag of weed...cost of upkeep just to prevent someone from getting stoned?), d. does it criminalise us? i.e. drive 1.5 km over a hundred while going down on a hill and you are a criminal if caught, you are also a criminal if a copper stops you on a motorway going fifty and you become a danger to society for slow driving.

Just use yer brains instead of just spouting feel good nonsense of how one is such a pillar of the community and the other is such a dreg.

[Edbear]

and then you have to realise that everything that was done in germany between 1933 - 1945 was legal and you might want to think about this comment again.

a lawmaker makes laws, but we as people might want to think about a. is it moral and ethical (and yeah moral and ethical is something that might want to be discussed further) and b. enforceable - do we need to employ a few more hundred donuts eaters that are essentially civilian losers to write tickets? , c. to the betterment of the community (is it good to throw someone in prison for years on end for a bag of weed...cost of upkeep just to prevent someone from getting stoned?), d. does it criminalise us? i.e. drive 1.5 km over a hundred while going down on a hill and you are a criminal if caught, you are also a criminal if a copper stops you on a motorway going fifty and you become a danger to society for slow driving.

Just use yer brains instead of just spouting feel good nonsense of how one is such a pillar of the community and the other is such a dreg.

You're drawing a very long bow to compare Nazi Germany here. If you know your history, "everything" was definitely not legal. Your argument is superfluous and invalid in the context of this thread.

We're discussing speed restrictions and the democratic process, not fascist dictatorships.

[scumdog]

i.e. drive 1.5 km over a hundred while going down on a hill and you are a criminal if caught,

When has THAT ever happened???

A far too common scaredy-cat alarmist full-of-shit over-reaction

[Scuba_Steve]

You're drawing a very long bow to compare Nazi Germany here. If you know your history, "everything" was definitely not legal. Your argument is superfluous and invalid in the context of this thread.

We're discussing speed restrictions and the democratic process, not fascist dictatorships.

You're ignoring the fact Germany WAS a "democracy" (like ours) when Hitler took control
You're also ignoring the fact despite what people like to pretend to make themselves feel better we're NOT a democracy.

[Edbear]

You're ignoring the fact Germany WAS a "democracy" (like ours) when Hitler took control
You're also ignoring the fact despite what people like to pretend to make themselves feel better we're NOT a democracy.

So make your submission to change the speed laws. What would you make them?

[blue rider]

You're drawing a very long bow to compare Nazi Germany here. If you know your history, "everything" was definitely not legal. Your argument is superfluous and invalid in the context of this thread.

We're discussing speed restrictions and the democratic process, not fascist dictatorships.

no i don't. What i am showing is that it takes a lot of good citizens doing nothing for one to be able to abuse stuff.

Germany was a democracy then as is New Zealand now. all it takes is for a populace to do nothing, a police to enforce laws regardless of morality or even legality (which by the way was one large tenet of the Nuremberg Process, that one must not obey an order if this order is illegal....remember the defence "i was following orders" did not count and was not accepted? )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders
it makes for interesting reading.
then there is always this

People crushed by law, have no hopes but from power. If laws are their enemies, they will be enemies to laws; and those who have much to hope and nothing to lose, will always be dangerous.
Letter to Charles James Fox (1777-10-08). Edmund Burke

and last but least

Arendt's book introduced the expression and concept "the banality of evil".[4] Her thesis is that Eichmann was not a fanatic or sociopath, but an extremely average person who relied on clich� rather than thinking for himself and was motivated by professional promotion rather than ideology. Banality, in this sense, is not that Eichmann's actions were ordinary, or that there is a potential Eichmann in all of us, but that his actions were motivated by a sort of stupidity which was wholly unexceptional.[5] She never denied that Eichmann was an anti-semite, nor that he was fully responsible for his actions, but argued that these characteristics were secondary to his stupidity.



Hannah Arendt called it "the banality of evil". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem

No country woke up being a dictator ship overnight, it usually is a slow process something like boiling frogs...the heat is increased slowly over time.

[haydes55]

So make your submission to change the speed laws. What would you make them?

I would remove every speed limit if it was up to me. Subsidise driver training and public transport. Increase driving offence penalties.

A speed limit is a target, a target can push a driver to go faster than their skill, or slower than the road, circumstance and driver can handle. A speed limit encourages drivers to overtake slowly. A speed limit encourages drivers to look for cops, instead of paying attention to their driving. A speed limit is driven lower than it should be, by the bottom 5% of drivers, who shouldn't hold a licence at all, they wouldn't have a licence if police prosecuted poor driving as efficiently as speeding.

Demerits should be for failing to operate a vehicle safely, that would include failing to indicate, failing to dip headlights, failing to give way, causing crashes or being distracted.

Demerits count against a licence, not a vehicle, demerits shouldn't count for no rego.

Slap a go pro on a round about pointing at each road leading to it. Send a $50 ticket to every car that fails to indicate correctly. Insurance companies would save tens of millions in repairing crash damaged vehicles.

Enforce the keep left rule. That will speed up the motorway and reduce crashes at motorway speeds. Why is NZ the only country where cops allow pea brained morons to cruise monotonously along the fast lane below the speed limit?

[Scuba_Steve]

So make your submission to change the speed laws. What would you make them?

What would I make them?... I wouldn't
There would be advisories where needed & the cops focus would be dangerous driving, something that would actually do something positive for road safety
Of-course the licence test would be much harder as you'll actually need to be able to drive before being allowed on the roads but then there'd only be 2 levels too Learners & Full; you're either learning or able, there is no mid ground you can either drive or you can't simple as that!

OK that's more an abridged version of if I was in control of the roads rather than just "what I'd make speed limits" but your answers there

[awayatc]

no i don't. What i am showing is that it takes a lot of good citizens doing nothing for one to be able to abuse stuff.

Germany was a democracy then as is New Zealand now. all it takes is for a populace to do nothing, a police to enforce laws regardless of morality or even legality (which by the way was one large tenet of the Nuremberg Process, that one must not obey an order if this order is illegal....remember the defence "i was following orders" did not count and was not accepted? )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders
it makes for interesting reading.
then there is always this

People crushed by law, have no hopes but from power. If laws are their enemies, they will be enemies to laws; and those who have much to hope and nothing to lose, will always be dangerous.
Letter to Charles James Fox (1777-10-08). Edmund Burke

and last but least

Arendt's book introduced the expression and concept "the banality of evil".[4] Her thesis is that Eichmann was not a fanatic or sociopath, but an extremely average person who relied on clich� rather than thinking for himself and was motivated by professional promotion rather than ideology. Banality, in this sense, is not that Eichmann's actions were ordinary, or that there is a potential Eichmann in all of us, but that his actions were motivated by a sort of stupidity which was wholly unexceptional.[5] She never denied that Eichmann was an anti-semite, nor that he was fully responsible for his actions, but argued that these characteristics were secondary to his stupidity.



Hannah Arendt called it "the banality of evil". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem

No country woke up being a dictator ship overnight, it usually is a slow process something like boiling frogs...the heat is increased slowly over time.

Pleased to see there is at least one person left on this forum with a functioning brain...
we are well on our way to become what we condemned the germans for....

just doing as we were told....
modern day nazi henchman drive commodores..

very sad....
very true....

[Tazz]

Pleased to see there is at least one person left on this forum with a functioning brain...
we are well on our way to become what we condemned the germans for....

just doing as we were told....
modern day nazi henchman drive commodores..

very sad....
very true....

Step by step, but you're a loon for thinking so you know. Back in line!

[awayatc]

Dont drink and write...

Not even on kb.....

[Edbear]

I would remove every speed limit if it was up to me. Subsidise driver training and public transport. Increase driving offence penalties.

A speed limit is a target, a target can push a driver to go faster than their skill, or slower than the road, circumstance and driver can handle. A speed limit encourages drivers to overtake slowly. A speed limit encourages drivers to look for cops, instead of paying attention to their driving. A speed limit is driven lower than it should be, by the bottom 5% of drivers, who shouldn't hold a licence at all, they wouldn't have a licence if police prosecuted poor driving as efficiently as speeding.

Demerits should be for failing to operate a vehicle safely, that would include failing to indicate, failing to dip headlights, failing to give way, causing crashes or being distracted.

Demerits count against a licence, not a vehicle, demerits shouldn't count for no rego.

Slap a go pro on a round about pointing at each road leading to it. Send a $50 ticket to every car that fails to indicate correctly. Insurance companies would save tens of millions in repairing crash damaged vehicles.

Enforce the keep left rule. That will speed up the motorway and reduce crashes at motorway speeds. Why is NZ the only country where cops allow pea brained morons to cruise monotonously along the fast lane below the speed limit?

What would I make them?... I wouldn't
There would be advisories where needed & the cops focus would be dangerous driving, something that would actually do something positive for road safety
Of-course the licence test would be much harder as you'll actually need to be able to drive before being allowed on the roads but then there'd only be 2 levels too Learners & Full; you're either learning or able, there is no mid ground you can either drive or you can't simple as that!

OK that's more an abridged version of if I was in control of the roads rather than just "what I'd make speed limits" but your answers there

Some very good points here. I'm sure that most Coppers would agree with most of it too.

[R650R]

Pop Quiz for the pro speeders....

YOU are pulling out of a junction or perhaps just changing lanes and misjudge the speed of an approaching vehicle that is exceeding the speed limit... a collisions results....
Now whose fault is it???