AA not happy we're getting off speed camera fines.

[pritch]

Reading carefully between the lines leads me to suspect that he is actually a very skilful troll.

I believe he is actually a she. Troll I can believe. Skilful? Nah!

[Voltaire]

hey what's wrong with the cheapest beer in the supermarket jeez

If you have to ask.....

[swbarnett]

I dont know where you live but the chance of getting caught by a cop was far greater in ChCh in the days of the MOT as there used to be far more motorbike cops than there is today.

I was born in Auckland and have only lived away from there for a cpouple of years (even now I live in hte Waikato but work in Auckland). I used to do anything up to 110kph on a 50 back in the '80s^*. Never got caught.

Did the MOT really advertise they were no longer going to police speed in your day?

No overt advertising. Just a news articles or two telling of how much nicer and safer the roads were since the speed enforcement was eased back. IIRC the head honcho at the time even said publicly that concentration on speed alone was counter-productive.





^*My one and only claim to a mispent youth.

[onearmedbandit]

I think the number of road deaths a year were higher back then so thats maybe why there is more speed enforcement today. You maybe just got lucky not getting a speeding ticket rather that the reason you think there was no or little enforcement.

Less to do with speed than the vastly improved safety of cars on the roads today you'll find. People still speed ya know. And there's a shit load more vehicles on the road.

[george formby]

Less to do with speed than the vastly improved safety of cars on the roads today you'll find. People still speed ya know. And there's a shit load more vehicles on the road.

Exceedingly pertinent. We are measuring the road toll in fatalities, so, unfortunately, we have limited tech to protect us. ABS is about it really, TC is just starting to make an appearance, but we do not have rider protection.

I would like to see the stats on major accidents, not fatal's, to see if they are dropping or not. Those numbers would be a better indicator of driver / rider behaviour than focusing on funerals and speed.

[Swoop]

You know what, I think you may be right. No one can be that delusional.

The jury is out...


I believe she's only here because of a fetish for the colour red.

[GrayWolf]

Next time Garmin asks if I want to purchase the safety camera updates maybe I'd better consider paying up. I wonder if the new cameras will be placed in "dangerous spots" on a hill like the one in the Ngauranga Gorge?

ONE camera, ONE?? Come and live near what must be THE most dangerous hill in New Zealand.... the Wainuiomata hill.. it has 3 camera's one at the bottom each side {griffins biscuit factory, and the last small row of shops in Wainui.. AND another one on the top of the hill

[Jin]

Shoot them out

[Moi]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/...-on-two-wheels

[v twin]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/...-on-two-wheels

No problem with that

[Ulsterkiwi]

I wrote the following to the guy in the AA who made the comments and copied in the editor of their magazine and the person in charge of member services

This is what I wrote:

Mr Stockdale
As an AA member of some years I am writing to express my utter disgust at your recent comments about motorcyclists to the press. As a representative from what is supposedly an organisation which advocates and represents motorists, I was astounded that you saw fit to paint a section of the motoring community with such broad, negative and ill-informed strokes.

I see that according to the AA website that your area of responsibility for media comments is petrol pricing. What qualifications do you have to comment on how motorcyclists think or act?

I am enraged that the AA has effectively determined that because I am a motorcyclist (as well as a driver) I somehow see myself as immune from speed limits and can use the roads as I see fit. I am not remotely interested in some explanation that you did not intend to include all motorcyclists in this group, as you know full well the impression which will be brought by the media is that the AA officially think all motorcyclists are recidivist speeders.

Not only were the comments poorly thought out, they are not based in fact. Any meaningful commentary on road fatalities must be set in the context of the rate at which fatalities happen. In other words, how does the road toll sit in relation to the size of the vehicle fleet using the roads? The increase in motorcycle registrations in recent years means the rate has in fact decreased. If the AA cannot get this correct, what chance is there for the media looking for yet more sensation!

The motorcycling community (like car drivers) undoubtedly has its bad apples, but how dare you group all those who travel on two wheels in that group. This is a community which is more at risk from far more prevalent types of behaviour such as inattentive drivers (the ubiquitous texters and facebookers), drunk drivers, drugged drivers, tired drivers, or generally poorly skilled drivers who fail to signal, look when joining from intersections, have not the faintest idea how to properly merge into a flow of traffic nor understand in the most basic fashion the meaning of a safe following distance. As road users we are in need of the support of the AA not a further blackening of our names. Why were the comments to the media not about these issues?
What other section of the motoring nation has embraced the idea of upping the standards for licence testing or pursuing ongoing training in order to improve skills in the manner which motorcyclists have?

I thought the AA took a sensible approach to the NZ Police obsession with speed as a major focus of road policing, your comments demonstrate otherwise. It is sad that a group who should be amongst the best informed have jumped on the bandwagon of picking easy targets.

Like many of my friends I now find myself wondering why I pay fees to an organisation which seems biased against me as a road user.

I didn't get a reply, which annoyed me. I was a member making a complaint and nothing from any of the three people included in the email.

So I wrote this:

Mr Stockdale and colleagues,
Over a month has passed and no reply to my comments. How surprised am I that a financial member of the organisation which pays your salaries writes to you to express extreme dissatisfaction with your performance and you do not even have the courtesy to acknowledge receipt of the email? By any measure of operating standards this is yet another poor performance!
I have seen no follow up on the ill-conceived and non-evidenced comments from Mr Stockdale, is this how the AA now operate? "Light the blue touch paper and retreat to a safe distance"?
I did see Mr Stockdale on the evening news recently, discussing the AA's position on petrol pricing, at least on this occasion he was doing his designated job but it does indicate he still works for the AA.
Just to reiterate, the AA is a service provider. I am a financial member paying for the provision of those services. I wrote in response to a well distributed public set of remarks by an officer of your organisation which were disparaging of myself and many other AA members. Not one of you saw fit to even acknowledge my communication let alone attempt to defend Mr Stockdale's comments. Poor show AA, very poor show.

So this afternoon I got this reply:

I apologise for not replying earlier. I took your original message as you simply wanting to state your views and didn’t think you were seeking a response. We normally are very good at responding to Members’ questions and, now that you have written again, I will try to respond to your points.



The AA did not instigate that story and my comments were certainly not designed to suggest all motorcyclists are speeders. When a reporter approached us with views held by some other road users that motorcycles should have front number plates for enforcement we said this would be totally unnecessary if speed cameras were reconfigured to take a photo of the rear of any speeding vehicles. I also said that if speed enforcement was important for safety, then we think this should be applied fairly to all road users – whether that’s cars, trucks or motorcyclists. This is a position that seems completely fair and reasonable to us.



In regards to your comments about how the road toll sits in relation to the size of the fleet, motorcycles make up less than 3% of the vehicles on the road yet made up 17% of road deaths and 10% of injuries in 2015. Ministry of Transport data shows the risks of being killed or hurt on the roads is 21 times higher for motorcyclists compared to car drivers and the fact that a higher percentage of motorcyclists are being hurt now than 10 years ago is a concern for organisations like the AA who are focussed on improving road safety. By comparison, despite there being more cars (and trucks) on the road, the road toll for other modes is largely static – meaning its declining on a fleet basis.



You note that motorcyclists are at more risk of bad behaviour from other road users on the road, like impaired driving, fatigue, inattention, and the AA and others are doing work in these areas. The AA supported reducing the drink drive limit, toughening the licence test (including introducing LAMS for motorcycling). We advocated strongly for mandating alcohol interlocks for repeat drink drivers and we also want roadside drug testing. We regularly do stories in the media warning of the risks from distracted driving and also want signage at fixed speed camera sites to give people more chance to slow down if they need to in these high risk areas.



Some of this work is already having benefits for everyone on the roads but we need to do more to focus on the areas with the highest risks. If we look at the currently popular issue of visiting drivers, in 2015 there were 20 deaths attributed to visiting drivers (6% of the total road toll) and more than 3 million people visited during the year. Nevertheless, the tourism industry, Government agencies and the AA are fully engaged in initiatives to reduce that 6% toll further. While educating road users and advertising are often suggested as ways to improve road safety, the evidence shows broad approaches trying to improve the behaviour of all road users at once is not an effective use of money. The ACC ‘Ride For Ever’ motorcycle programme is an exception which does work, but then it’s a much smaller and dare I say more engaged group. In reality the biggest benefits will likely come from building safer roads, making sure speed limits reflect the safety of different roads, as well as improvements in vehicle technology. These alone won’t be enough though and as one of the most at-risk groups on the roads motorcyclists will be an important focus.



I’d just like to say again that the original story you complained about was not intended to be any sort of attack on motorcyclists and simply pointing out that speed enforcement should apply equally to all vehicles – something which isn’t currently the case.

He side stepped a few of the points I raised but it was good to get a response at least. Anyway, I thought we could flog the dead horse again.......

[Akzle]

tl:dr
sumarise that shit nigga

[Ulsterkiwi]

tl:dr
sumarise that shit nigga

ok

"hoi, arsehole, what gives?"

"hoi, arsehole, its me again, you didnt tell me!"

"oh sorry, didn't think you meant it, uhm..... distraction distraction distraction, so yeah, we good now?"

[Akzle]

ok

"hoi, arsehole, what gives?"

"hoi, arsehole, its me again, you didnt tell me!"

"oh sorry, didn't think you meant it, uhm..... distraction distraction distraction, so yeah, we good now?"

you should continue to give them money. and probably phone talkback and harrumf, and such. that'll show em.

[Ulsterkiwi]

you should continue to give them money. and probably phone talkback and harrumf, and such. that'll show em.

yeah probably. Where can I vote Akzle?