New Police Stats.

[Drunken Monkey]

Spuds argument is self defeating; more, extremely well funded, traffic cops haven't lowered the road toll, yet more general duties cops are going to lower the crime rate. How?
They need to think quality, not quantity.

Well now that's just not comparing apples with apples Lou - you should know better than that.

[spudchucka]

Spuds argument is self defeating; more, extremely well funded, traffic cops haven't lowered the road toll, yet more general duties cops are going to lower the crime rate. How?
They need to think quality, not quantity.

Again you shoot off at the mouth and don't offer any reasonable alternatives. How would you suggest the police improve quality without the quantity?

If you ever had any actual experience as a front line cop your logic might carry some weight but since you are just an ex traffic cop from the MOT era I'm not surprised by your complete ignorance on the subject of reucing crime. Cops on the street 24 / 7 getting in the faces of active crims, stopping their cars, knowing where they are, what they are doing and who they are doing it to is the key to any crime reduction strategy. You can be as smart and have all the best intel, (by the way you can't gather intel without cops on the street) possible but without the cops on the street all initiatives are futile. Its like fighting a war without infantry, eventually someone has just got to get in and do the dirty work.

I'm all for a seperate traffic dept but for the time being traffic enforcement is the domain of the police and they are duty bound to uphold the law and to prosecute those who flaut it. Don't forget that burglars and thieves all drive cars as well, traffic enforcement is just another tool to use to shut down their criminal activities. I know you will never see the value of traffic enforcement in this regard because you were never a cop and your understanding only goes as far as some dumb shmuck getting a ticket for 11 kph over the limit. Jail is the place for criminals and there is more than one way to skin a cat.

[scumdog]

I'll say it again: are you more likely to be injured in violent crime, home invasions, or road crashes?

Just to put a different slant on things, my stepson was injured in a crash, the car he was a passenger in left the Highcliff road near Dunedin and went arse over tit down the steep hill.
He was the most seriously injured with his injuries including broken verterbrae.
Now here's my point: we all think "aw yeah, a few days in hospital, cost of vehicle recovery etc, can't cost too much" - well already I have seen the building up of costs, i.e. the expense of fire/ambo/police attending the scene, the hospital staff tied up with the A&E side of things, the clothing that had to be cut from the injured, the property that was lost/damaged in the crash, the travel expense/lost wages of family members that rushed to the hospital, the extra meals/parking fees etc for them, the scanning costs for the injured, the specialists and surgeons costs, the ongoing medication/physiotherapy, loss of income by the injured, ACC payouts etc etc etc.
No wonder the Govt wants to see the crash rate drop, and guess what, the crash was the result of somebody driving TOO FAST!!!!!
It was just one of those crashes that hardly gets heard of outside of the province, JUST a one vehicle/three injured crash
Eff all you bastards that "I'll drive/ride how I like"

[spudchucka]

Just to put a different slant on things, my stepson was injured in a crash, the car he was a passenger in left the Highcliff road near Dunedin and went arse over tit down the steep hill.
He was the most seriously injured with his injuries including broken verterbrae.
Now here's my point: we all think "aw yeah, a few days in hospital, cost of vehicle recovery etc, can't cost too much" - well already I have seen the building up of costs, i.e. the expense of fire/ambo/police attending the scene, the hospital staff tied up with the A&E side of things, the clothing that had to be cut from the injured, the property that was lost/damaged in the crash, the travel expense/lost wages of family members that rushed to the hospital, the extra meals/parking fees etc for them, the scanning costs for the injured, the specialists and surgeons costs, the ongoing medication/physiotherapy, loss of income by the injured, ACC payouts etc etc etc.
No wonder the Govt wants to see the crash rate drop, and guess what, the crash was the result of somebody driving TOO FAST!!!!!
It was just one of those crashes that hardly gets heard of outside of the province, JUST a one vehicle/three injured crash
Eff all you bastards that "I'll drive/ride how I like"

Sadly it often takes an experience like this for people to learn how fragile humans are and the costs involved in vehicle crashes. Crashes like this happen very frequently and it is usually young guys hooning with their mates, (I'm not saying this was the case with your son).

[Sk8r_Boi_]

Yeah ive sat at red lights for about 10 or so minutes i just give up after awhile and turn around and go a different why.........they so need to do something about that aye

[Indo]

Indo, I'll choose option 3

Err option three, was a speed limit that only applies to you, Lou.

They haven't even made the top 5 trusted professions in the latest Readers Digest poll

Readers digest? thats like me pulling stats outa the womens weekly...

Restore cops discretion, do away with ticket quotas.

Agree.

Remove roadside licence suspension, this should be the provence of a court. Power of arrest will suffice if a driver needs to be removed from the road.

Unless you increase the offences for which a driver can be arrested, this would only result in many more idiots offending to the extreme on the roads.

Replace speed cameras with humans.

Why, less cops on the motorway = more cops fighting crime on the streets.

Have speed limits reflect the risk factor of given roads. Eg. higher limits for good, less travelled roads; lower, stricter limits for high risk areas such as school zones, shopping areas.

This would be nice if we had drivers who actually paid attention to road signs. I think the KISS principle applies here.

Heavier enforcement of intersection and vehicle positioning offences.

Agree, red light runners piss me off no end. I think setting red light cameras at all major intersections would be a good start.

Tougher driving tests with at least 15-20 hours professional instruction required.Better qualified and trained driver testers run by a Govt. agency, not a private company. ( An ex-teacher with 3 days training does not a tester make.).

Agree, the tests here are a joke. Its disturbing thou also the amount of people who find the current tests to hard, don't bother to even sit them and still continue to drive without licenses. The courts have to take a much harder line on unlicensed and forbidden drivers, at the moment the penalities are a joke. Plus international licenses should only be accepted from certain countries, those with rules and driving tests similar to our own.

Now, I am a whinger, whiner, hater in some peoples eyes.

Not really, in mine your just ignorant and bitter. You have some irrational hatred of Police, yet have no knowledge or experience of what Police in this country actually do. I would love you to spend a day in a car with a general duties cop in a place like Glen Innes, Otara or Mangere, the sad fact is you and most other cop haters would probably be too scared to even get out of the car.









.

[marty]

i have added the numbers for ease of reply....

(1) Indo, I'll choose option 3, it worked well for many decades. especially from 1984 till 2000 when the decline in the road toll was reversed with the advent of 'rigid enforcement'.


(2) A side benefit of this would be a reversal in the decline in public approval of the Police, now facing 66% approval instead of 90% plus as it used to be. They haven't even made the top 5 trusted professions in the latest Readers Digest poll.

As for a wish list; this is what I'd like to see;
(3) Traffic enforcement to be carried out by a separately funded body whether part of the Police or not.

(4) Restore cops discretion, do away with ticket quotas.

(5) Remove roadside licence suspension, this should be the provence of a court. Power of arrest will suffice if a driver needs to be removed from the road. Then the facts of the matter can be tested quickly by a court.

(6) Replace speed cameras with humans.

(7) Have speed limits reflect the risk factor of given roads. Eg. higher limits for good, less travelled roads; lower, stricter limits for high risk areas such as school zones, shopping areas.

(8) Heavier enforcement of intersection and vehicle positioning offences.

(9) More bikes used in enforcement.

(10) Tougher driving tests with at least 15-20 hours professional instruction required.

(11) Better qualified and trained driver testers run by a Govt. agency, not a private company. ( An ex-teacher with 3 days training does not a tester make.

(12) A road safety body that utilises the best research available, not just that which fits their Political masters wishes. ( Monash University)

(13) 10 yearly retesting at licence renewal for all.

(14) The pro-police camp have made a lot of personal attacks, but have not come up with figures to substantiate their arguments. Tell us, in terms of fatalities per 10,000 vehicles and per 100,000 km's, how the road toll has improved since 2000 til now.

(15) Spuds argument is self defeating; more, extremely well funded, traffic cops haven't lowered the road toll, yet more general duties cops are going to lower the crime rate. How?
They need to think quality, not quantity.

(16) Now, I am a whinger, whiner, hater in some peoples eyes. Yet, I'm in good company; Dr. Alan Wilkinson, whose research has been agreed with by the University of Canberra, Prof. John Bailey; whose, politically incorrect, but accurate research has been ignored by Govts for 20+ years. And all the others, Graeme Barlow, Mark Petch and everyone who believes that the current policies are more about income than saving lives.

(17) If it wasn't, why are local bodies greedily eyeing speed camera revenue. Waitakere City now want to run their own speed camera operation. Only to save lives of course. But they don't want to have to fund a full Traffic dept. though.

Lou. you obviously put some time into your argument, so i'll put some into mine .

(1) road toll - 1998/501, 1999/508, 2000/462, 2001/455, 2002/404, 2003 (at a comparable date to today)/185, 2004(to date)/161. looks like a drop to me, not a 'decline in the road toll was reversed with the advent of 'rigid enforcement' (HP inception Dec 2000)

(2) public approval of the police - began declining the moment the police and MOT merged. Tell me, did the MOT have quotas?

(3) separate enforcement - sort of worked once, it is too entwined now. i used to get called to MOT units being outnumbered, outwitted, outsized, outoftheirdepth all the time - can't see how that would change.

(4) cops still have discretion - it is an integral part of individuality. there are plenty of stories from guys on here being let off for ridiculous speeds. ticket quotas are bullshit, there is of course to pressure to justify a days work (as there is in any career), but expected contact rates are clearly defined.

(5) roadside suspension is currently only for non-subjective matters - EBA and speed. surely the roadside suspension limits are set at reasonable levels. you cannot be roadside suspended for dangerous/reckless driving, as that needs to be tested by the court. Arrest is a serious infringment on a persons rights, and for summary matters they should be bailed at the earliest opportunity (this is well tested by case law, Bill of Rights Act etc), and the holding (not bailing) of someone simply for the purpose of removing them from the road for speeding would be frowned upon i am sure. and tested in court quickly? in the current court system?

(6) speed camera have slowed me down. I have had one camera ticket in my private car since their inception (61 in a 50), and i paid it without grumbling too much. if it's good enough for me, then it's good enough for you.

(7) what about a school zone on a good, less travelled road? or a shopping area just off a motorway off ramp? KISS. or encourage toll roads that are engineered to high speed use (although route PJK in tauranga, which is huge and can easily be ridden safely at speed) has a speed limit of 80kmh.

(8) no argument, although at the expense of what? what about if your house next to the intersection has been burgled, and some cop is sitting there writing tickets, not interested in your burglary?

(9) old Ministry speak going on here. i'm all for it myself, (who would run from a blackbird or busa patrol bike?)

(10) great idea, but who pays? 20 hours @ $40 an hour? countries that have driver training like this (Finland etc) have low road tolls, but they also have unbelievably strict road rules - lifetime disqualification/heavy prison for EBA/Dangerous etc.

(11) this could be said for just about any sector of the tertiary education sector at the moment, and is indicitave of the 'saving money to give to the poor' attitude of the current govt.

(12) the AA (last time i checked they were independent) supports roadside suspension, and in fact recently supported dropping the suspension speed to 40k over, and EBA to 0.6 (currently at 0.8).

(13) no problem with that. user pays i presume. is that testing for all classes? currently at around $100 for a basic car, $100 for bike, say $200 each for all truck classes, goodness knows how much for self laying tracks.....

(14) i'm not sure how these go together, but (a) i am sure those stats are there somewhere and (b) personally i'm getting bored with the name calling and pathetic nature of some of the comments on here.

(15) yes they have, yes they will. it called broken windows theory, and it is well documented, well proven (eg: Rudolph.W Guiliani, 'Leadership', Mirimax Books New York 2002)

(16) yup. but comparing yourself to world-class researchers? and graeme barlow and mark petch are only magazine editors with a public soapbox.

(17) hadn't heard this one. see number (6). if you don't mind paying, then just speed right past.....

[spudchucka]

The pro-police camp have made a lot of personal attacks, but have not come up with figures to substantiate their arguments. Tell us, in terms of fatalities per 10,000 vehicles and per 100,000 km's, how the road toll has improved since 2000 til now.

Lou to answer your question it seems that stats regarding M/V crashes do actually indicate a reducing road toll per 10,000 vehicles and per 100,000 population, go figure.

Check for yourself at-
http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/ann...al-table-2.pdf

1996: Deaths / 100,000 population = 12.3, deaths / 10000 vehicles = 1.9
1997: Deaths / 100,000 population = 12.4, deaths / 10000 vehicles = 2.0
1998: Deaths / 100,000 population = 11.5, deaths / 10000 vehicles = 1.8
1999: Deaths / 100,000 population = 11.4, deaths / 10000 vehicles = 1.7
2000: Deaths / 100,000 population = 10.0, deaths / 10000 vehicles = 1.5
2001: Deaths / 100,000 population = 10.3, deaths / 10000 vehicles = 1.5
2002: Deaths / 100,000 population = 9.2, deaths / 10000 vehicles = 1.3

I'm no mathmetitan but last time I checked 9.2 was less than 12.3 and 1.3 was less than 1.9. I'll happily stand corrected on this issue if I have somehow misunderstood this.

This probably won't copy & paste too well but you can look for yourself at
http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/fatal5yr.html#crash

Fatal road crashes in New Zealand
1996 - 2002
Fatal crashes during 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
January 28 35 37 42 25 38 32
February 32 38 38 39 31 34 34
March 44 44 43 27 34 34 34
April 32 48 29 47 39 36 21
May 35 38 32 29 36 44 39
June 49 37 36 30 32 29 36
July 35 32 37 29 26 30 29
August 37 37 24 49 23 21 27
September 28 29 35 30 38 26 22
October 42 35 44 35 23 28 26
November 43 43 41 39 30 26 30
December 52 52 39 37 46 48 34

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total 457 468 435 433 383 394 364

Anyway, what it shows is a downward trend between 1996 - 2002.

Below are the current years stats for fatal road crashes available at -
http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/ann...x.html#summary

Summary data

Road crashes
fatal 364
injury 9798

Casualties
deaths 404
injuries 13918

Casualty rates
deaths per 10,000 vehicles 1.5
injuries per 10,000 vehicles 51
deaths per 100,000 population 10.3
injuries per 100,000 population 353



Current year to date road deaths.

As at 28 May 2004 172
Same time last year 193
Last 12 months 440

Lets hope this year the road toll goes under 400 again.

[spudchucka]

Here's some more interesting LTSA blurb.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/speed1.html

Have a look at the 85th percentile graph at the bottom of the page and ask yourself why the LTSA / Police target drivers exceeding 11kph above the posted speed limit. It seems that 15% of drivers on the road exceed the speed limit by this amount or more, the other 85% of motorists are good boys & girls who rarely travell above the speed limit.


Surprise surprise the same is true for urban speed limits as well.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/speed2.html

Its that same old naughty 15% again!!

[spudchucka]

Drink driving stats are quite intersting too.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/drink.html

In 1980 alcohol was a contributing factor in 217 road deaths or 36.2% of the road toll. In 1986 alcohol contributed to 328 road deaths or 42.8% of all road deaths. Since 1986 there has been a steady decline in alcohol related road deaths and by 2002 has reduced to 109 road deaths or 27% of the road toll.

I guess those hated alcohol check points that violate everbodys rights must also be having an effect on the road toll. I wouldn't count on check points dissapearing any time soon.

[spudchucka]

This one is quite intersting also.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/ann...al-table-3.pdf

Check out the all time high score for the road toll in 1973 - 843 deaths.

273 drivers of motor cars.
250 passengers of motor cars
130 motorcyclists and pillion passengers
30 Cyclists
157 pedestrians, (holy crap)
3 other road users

[spudchucka]

Here's a bunch of motorcycle related crash stats.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/ann...otorcycle.html

[Lou Girardin]

I read it incorrectly, I'll take option 4 if I'm allowed.
Readers Digest has a very conservative readership, similar demographic to the AA.
You accept AA surveys but not this, how strange
Of course, AA members were all in favour of speed cameras too, until they started getting pinged on the way to the bowling club.
Public approval has fallen dramatically since 2000, not '92.
Most of the time,MOT guys called the Police because they didn't even have arrest powers for failing to give ID particulars. It was either call the cops or let the offender go.
I've dealt with offenders carrying knives, gang members, and other types of lowlife. They weren't quite as numerous as they are now though. We were nearly always outnumbered and most offenders were bigger than me, But while some of these guys did worry me, I did my job as did nearly everyone I worked with. Don't forget that it took years of lobbying before we were even issued handcuffs, let alone batons.
And also don't forget the MOT guys that died on duty, Robin Dudding for one.
Arresting someone for dangerous is a "serious infringement of their rights" and plucking their licence for 28 days isn't? If the offence is serious enough to warrant removal from the road, it's serious enough for arrest.
No figures for deaths per 100,000kms?
No figures for 2003?
Guiliani achieved his results with substantially the same number of Police. He employed them more effectively.
Only 15% of drivers travell at 11 km/h or more over the limit? Couldn't have been surveyed in Auckland.
280,000 Officer issued tickets last year were for less than 20km/h over the limit. Add approx 230,000 camera tickets and you have over 500,000 drivers ticketed. Are there 3.3 million drivers in NZ? Or is this more creative statistics from the naughty scamps at the LTSA?
85th percentile rings a bell.
Oh yes, that's what cameras were introduced to enforce. One South Island road having a 127 km/h trigger speed! Until the Govt saw all the lovely loot coming in, then we got a blanket 11 km/h trigger speed.
And Lasers were introduced to target the clever, high speed drivers that radar couldn't catch. We could see on TV all those clever, high speed drivers being pinged in the Mt. Victoria tunnel. Couldn't we.
Irrational hatred of the Police? Not really, just as the Christians don't hate the sinner just the sin. I don't hate the Police, just their policies. But it does seem that there is some hatred from some quarters in here.

[marty]

I read it incorrectly no shit, I'll take option 4 if I'm allowed.
Readers Digest has a very conservative readership, similar demographic to the AA. except they have an interest in motoring
You accept AA surveys but not this, how strange
Of course, AA members were all in favour of speed cameras too, until they started getting pinged on the way to the bowling club. if they couldn't see that happening then should they even be driving?
Public approval has fallen dramatically since 2000, not '92. i've been in the police since pre-merger, and it's been dropping ever since that fateful day (hey maybe it's MY fault.....)
Most of the time,MOT guys called the Police because they didn't even have arrest powers for failing to give ID particulars. It was either call the cops or let the offender go. any offence under the Transport Act 1962 was arrestable by a Traffic Officer in full uniform and displaying a badge of authority. in my experience - they just got too big for their boots. Auck City Council staff though didn't have the same powers - maybe that's who you're thinking of there.
I've dealt with offenders carrying knives, gang members, and other types of lowlife. They weren't quite as numerous as they are now though. or tripping out on 'P' utnumbered and most offenders were bigger than me, But while some of these guys did worry me, I did my job as did nearly everyone I worked with. Don't forget that it took years of lobbying before we were even issued handcuffs, let alone batons.
And also don't forget the MOT guys that died on duty, Robin Dudding for one. full respect to any officer who has died on duty (2 officers that i worked with and knew personally have. how did this comment get in here?)
Arresting someone for dangerous is a "serious infringement of their rights" and plucking their licence for 28 days isn't? If the offence is serious enough to warrant removal from the road, it's serious enough for arrest. (i don't think you understand the difference between the rights attached to personal freedom, and not being bailable as of right, as opposed to the taking away of something that is given to you on the understanding that if you abuse it, that you will lose it. there is a chasm of difference between arbitrary arrest, and roadside suspension - which is not arbitrary, but is enshrined in legislation) No figures for deaths per 100,000kms?
No figures for 2003?
Guiliani achieved his results with substantially the same number of Police. He employed them more effectively.
Only 15% of drivers travell at 11 km/h or more over the limit? Couldn't have been surveyed in Auckland.
280,000 Officer issued tickets last year were for less than 20km/h over the limit. Add approx 230,000 camera tickets and you have over 500,000 drivers ticketed. Are there 3.3 million drivers in NZ? Or is this more creative statistics from the naughty scamps at the LTSA? (i don't get your maths here)
85th percentile rings a bell.
Oh yes, that's what cameras were introduced to enforce. One South Island road having a 127 km/h trigger speed! Until the Govt saw all the lovely loot coming in, then we got a blanket 11 km/h trigger speed. (cameras were introduced to photograph speeders. the 85th percentile was a convenient cut off, but it was obvious that depending on where you were, you may or may not get a ticket. imagine being allowed to travel with impunity at 75k in a 50 in auckland, then getting pinged in dunedin for the same thing - you be moaning loud and long about that. at 11kmh over, there is nationwide compliance, nationwide expectation - i know i will get as ticket for 111 on the southern motorway, or the kaikoura coast, so i keep my speed down accordingly, or pay the tickets when i know i've been snapped.)
And Lasers were introduced to target the clever, high speed drivers that radar couldn't catch. We could see on TV all those clever, high speed drivers being pinged in the Mt. Victoria tunnel. Couldn't we. (just like the valentine 1 etc etc were introduced to avoid it. it's all part of the game lou, a game that you just can't stand losing)
Irrational hatred of the Police? Not really, just as the Christians don't hate the sinner just the sin. I don't hate the Police, just their policies. (your rhetoric suggests otherwise - you at least hold them in contempt) But it does seem that there is some hatred from some quarters in here. (of course there is - we can't all love each other)

not only did you read it incorrectly lou, you went on to base your whole self-fulfilling argument on it. you argue like a single policy political party, plenty of rhetoric, personal attacks and narrow mindedness.

i won't be partaking any more in a discussion with someone who can't even get their facts right to open with.

[spudchucka]

No figures for deaths per 100,000kms?
No figures for 2003?

Everyone know 2003 was a horror year for road deaths, I guess thats why you are pressing that point, to show an increas in the road toll. I'm sure I pasted in the current years figures, if I didn't there is a link to those figures. I couldn't find any stats for deaths per 100,000 kms only per 100,000 of population, if I had found it I would have posted it.

Only 15% of drivers travell at 11 km/h or more over the limit? Couldn't have been surveyed in Auckland.

Have a look at the link I provided it has a break down of the areas surveyed. I can't remember Aucklands figures so have a look for yourself.

280,000 Officer issued tickets last year were for less than 20km/h over the limit. Add approx 230,000 camera tickets and you have over 500,000 drivers ticketed. Are there 3.3 million drivers in NZ? Or is this more creative statistics from the naughty scamps at the LTSA?

Less than 20 kph over the limit or between 11 - 20 kph over the limit? Which is of course the exact bracket that the 85th percentile refers to. There aren't 3.3 million drivers in NZ, that must be obvious to anyone. It must therefore be the same percentage of drivers in NZ that continually exceed the speed limit and are being prosecuted for it. Creative stats exist on all sides of an arguement. They don't mean anything unless the person reading the stats is able to read them objectively.

85th percentile rings a bell.

What bell?

Oh yes, that's what cameras were introduced to enforce. One South Island road having a 127 km/h trigger speed! Until the Govt saw all the lovely loot coming in, then we got a blanket 11 km/h trigger speed.

127km/h trigger speed is ridiculous. There is a national speed limit so the cameras should be managed in a nationwide uniform manner.

And Lasers were introduced to target the clever, high speed drivers that radar couldn't catch. We could see on TV all those clever, high speed drivers being pinged in the Mt. Victoria tunnel. Couldn't we.

So does that make it improper use of the device? Perhaps you would prefer the instalation of a static camera? Lasers, Radar, Cameras - they are all just tools, how they are used is not up to you.

Irrational hatred of the Police? Not really, just as the Christians don't hate the sinner just the sin. I don't hate the Police, just their policies. But it does seem that there is some hatred from some quarters in here.

I don't hate you, how can I hate someone I've never met? I'll admit that I think you have some seriously unusual views but as far as what is said on this forum you are just an internet persona with many opposing views to myself. Having said that I wouldn't poke you in the eye if I ever met you, in fact it would probably be a rather interesting encounter.