Setting Of Speed Limits - Consultation

[rastuscat]

The road is a recreational space for motorcyclists isn't it, unless commuting?

It's fun to ride. That's why we choose bikes, I guess. Using the roads as a rec space is perfectly acceptable, in my view.

But using them as a play ground, well, maybe not so much.

[rastuscat]

Here it was the only quick fix given traffic was already causing issues but as in many other areas, and i am guessing here, once whatever problem was fixed they never came back to put the speed limit back to what it was.

Perhaps the realisation struck that the lower speed limit reduced the number and severity of crashes.

I note that the new draft Speed Limit Setting Rule has a category of road being "mountainous or hill corridors, being Roads where the alignment is tortuous". Weka Pass has it's share of hills and curves that likely justify that designation.

[Berries]

Perhaps the realisation struck that the lower speed limit reduced the number and severity of crashes.

Or the burning down of the Waipara Hotel in 2014 stopped drink driving in the area?

I imagine there has been zero detailed analysis of crashes to prove it either way which is a shame. If it was looked at in detail and a direct link made between the speed limit and crashes then I might believe it but most analysis is very broad brush and jumps too quickly to conclusions that just so happen to support the current road safety regime.

[rastuscat]

the current road safety regime.

The current road safety regime is more concerned with economic efficiency than safety.

I see this as confirmation bias. I see what I want to from the data, and others see what they want to. On the up side, I have one eye on other opinions too, unlike some.

[Berries]

Sorry, I meant "most analysis is very broad brush and jumps too quickly to conclusions that just so happen to support the road safety regime of that particular time.

18 months ago lower speed limits and median barriers were the go so the analysis that was being done would often show that there would be benefits by introducing one or the other when it was actually a bit of a stretch to claim some of those benefits. Some of the obvious disbenefits were totally ignored. All just part of the ever growing road safety gravy train.

[FJRider]

Speed signs are optional. They're guidelines for the weak-willed. Go as fast as you want, wherever you want. Do eeeet!

That is it in the purest sense of Motorcycling, and Personal Choices.

We all know the risks involved. And not just the risks of getting caught.

Just DO IT. You know you want to ...

[rastuscat]

Sorry, I meant "most analysis is very broad brush and jumps too quickly to conclusions that just so happen to support the road safety regime of that particular time.

18 months ago lower speed limits and median barriers were the go so the analysis that was being done would often show that there would be benefits by introducing one or the other when it was actually a bit of a stretch to claim some of those benefits. Some of the obvious disbenefits were totally ignored. .

We are in an interesting time. 5 to 10 years from now we will be able to look back at the speed limits that have been reduced only to be reset to previous levels. That'll be a rich bed for research, based on efficiency v safety.

[SaferRides]

I recently did a return journey from Nelson to Westport in a rental after doing the journey on a motorbike a couple years ago. There are a couple of reduced speed limits in the hills before Murchison, and in your average small SUV (CX5) on a wet day, you wouldn't want to be going any faster in places. But on a motorbike they seemed stupidly slow.

It will be interesting to see what happens after the new rule comes into effect, as I can't see the government backing down on this issue. It's a pity that there is unlikely to be good quality data to make an assessment of the effects of the changes to the rule.



Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[jellywrestler]

We are in an interesting time. 5 to 10 years from now we will be able to look back at the speed limits that have been reduced only to be reset to previous levels. That'll be a rich bed for research, based on efficiency v safety.

or they can ban cars using a model like the asbestos debacle in new zealand, a zero tolerance policy driven entirely by those who make money from the stuff and their scare mongering.....

[SaferRides]

The Herald appears to be on some kind of crusade against the rule change: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/expert...J62KMM5QP3QAY/
This was on the front page today.

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[frogfeaturesFZR]

Apparently the Herald knows what’s best for the rest of us.
Excuse me, if I disagree
Rather sick of opinions being presented as news TBH

[R650R]

Interesting doco on road deaths in Texas. In this good old freedom loving part of America you get off with just a warning for the first four speed violations!! They can’t fine you until you’ve had your four warnings. And even if you’re going stupid fast that is bad enough to warrant a court appearance you get to carry on driving and will get off with a good lawyer.

At 30 million they have five times our population but worse stats. About 4300 killed last year, that’s a death every 2 hours. A serious crash happens once every minute and serious injury one person every two minutes.




• The Fatality Rate on Texas roadways for
2023 was 1.45 deaths per hundred million
vehicle miles traveled. This is a 4.10%
decrease from 2022.
• Texas experienced a decrease in the
number of motor vehicle traffic fatalities.
The 2023 death toll of 4,283 was a
decrease of 2.81% from the 4,407 deaths
recorded in 2022.
• There were 15,219 serious injury crashes in
Texas in 2023 with 18,752 people
sustaining a serious injury*.
• The annual vehicle miles traveled in Texas
during 2023 reached 294.785 billion, an
increase of 1.34% over the 290.891 billion
traveled in 2022.
• Fatalities in traffic crashes in rural areas of
the state accounted for 52.84% of the
state’s traffic fatalities. There were 2,263
deaths in rural traffic crashes.
• Single vehicle, run-off the road crashes
resulted in 1,368 deaths in 2023. This was
31.94% of all motor vehicle traffic deaths in
2023.
• In 2023 there were 1,120 people killed in
crashes occurring in intersections or related
to an intersection.
• There were 635 people killed in head-on
crashes in 2023.
• There were no deathless days on Texas
roadways in 2023.
• There were five crashes that resulted in 6
or more fatalities in 2023.
• Saturday, September 9th was the deadliest
day in 2023 with twenty-five (25) persons
killed in traffic crashes. June and August
were the deadliest months with 390
persons killed.
• Based on reportable crashes in 2023:
� 1 person was killed every 2 hours
3 minutes
� 1 person was injured every 2
minutes 6 seconds
� 1 reportable crash occurred every
56 seconds
• Of all persons killed in vehicles where
restraint usage was applicable and usage
was known in 2023, 48.89% were reported
as not restrained when the fatal crash
occurred.
• 250,335 persons were injured in motor
vehicle traffic crashes in 2023.
• There were 599 motorcyclists (operators
and passengers) killed in 2023. forty
percent (40%) of motorcyclists killed were
not wearing helmets at the time of the
crash.
• Pedestrian fatalities totaled 807 in 2023.
This is a 0.98% decrease from 2022.
• Pedalcyclist fatalities totaled 105 in 2023.
This is a 15.38% increase from 2022.
• In 2023, there were 1,090 people killed in
motor vehicle traffic crashes where a driver
was under the influence of alcohol. This is
25.45% of the total number of people killed
in motor vehicle traffic crashes.
• During 2023, more DUI - Alcohol crashes
were reported in the hour between 2:00 am
and 2:59 am than any other hour of the day.
Also, more of these crashes occurred on
Sunday than any other day of the week.
• In 2023, there were 403 people killed in
crashes involving distracted driving. This is
an 17.25% decrease from 2022.
• There were no fatalities caused by a bridge
collapse in 2023.

[rastuscat]

• There were 599 motorcyclists (operators
and passengers) killed in 2023. forty
percent (40%) of motorcyclists killed were
not wearing helmets at the time of the
crash.

Not to say that helmets will save everyone, but I bet a few would have survived. It's actually an interesting commentary on state control. The anti-helmet argument is mostly around personal freedom.

They don't have ACC there, so the argument is different here.

Funny, while conducting a Basic Handling Skills Test a few years back, I had a client tell me he can't ride with gloves, as his hands aren't sensitive enough to feel the controls. Amazingly, when told he had no choice, or the test wouldn't happen, his hands suddenly developed sensitivity. Kind of miraculous, really. It was en example of someone taking a position, then finding reasons and "evidence" to support his position.

Confirmation bias. Happens all the time every day. I even find myself having to try to avoid it.

[SaferRides]

Wearing a helmet on a motorbike has been compulsory for as long as I can remember and I am struggling to remember the last time I saw someone without a helmet on the road, apart from the odd dirt bike rider.

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[rastuscat]

Wearing a helmet on a motorbike has been compulsory for as long as I can remember and I am struggling to remember the last time I saw someone without a helmet on the road, apart from the odd dirt bike rider.

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

Yes, that's not what I was saying. The Texas figures are just reflective of the personal choice argument gone wild.