Police are planning...

[MikeL]

There are valid points being made by both sides of this debate. It would be helpful in clarifying the issues if egos and the odd chip on the shoulder could be removed from the equation. Here's a slightly different perspective:

Economic and political considerations (most of which are or could be government-directed) have put more vehicles on the roads than before, not just in absolute numbers but per capita. The differential between the performance capabiliies of these modern vehicles and the standard of roading (and legal speed limits) is considerably greater than in the past. Investment in roading lags way behind other similar countries. The procedure for obtaining a licence has changed and the process is now considerably more involved, but it is debateable whether the actual standard of knowledge and skill is more demanding. And of course there is no on-going requirement for driver education once a full licence has been obtained. Recent immigration has put onto our roads a large number of drivers who were trained under very different conditions and have to adapt quickly to different rules, traffic flows and speeds. Overseas visitors and students arrive in large numbers and are able to drive on their national licence which again was obtained under very different circumstances. All these are the result of economic or political developments and decisions occurring at a level way above the individual driver and his responsibility.

And when the inevitable consequence is increased death and injury, are the above factors taken into consideration and the blame fairly apportioned and steps taken to remedy these deficiencies?
No. In their bureaucratic tunnel-vision, the authorities see (or want to see) only one problem: the driver. Just hammer him until you get the desired result. If the desired result happens, keep hammering him because it's obviously working. If the result doesn't happen, hammer him harder.
Is this a fair and reasonable response?

[Quasievil]

There are valid points being made by both sides of this debate. It would be helpful in clarifying the issues if egos and the odd chip on the shoulder could be removed from the equation. Here's a slightly different perspective:

Economic and political considerations (most of which are or could be government-directed) have put more vehicles on the roads than before, not just in absolute numbers but per capita. The differential between the performance capabiliies of these modern vehicles and the standard of roading (and legal speed limits) is considerably greater than in the past. Investment in roading lags way behind other similar countries. The procedure for obtaining a licence has changed and the process is now considerably more involved, but it is debateable whether the actual standard of knowledge and skill is more demanding. And of course there is no on-going requirement for driver education once a full licence has been obtained. Recent immigration has put onto our roads a large number of drivers who were trained under very different conditions and have to adapt quickly to different rules, traffic flows and speeds. Overseas visitors and students arrive in large numbers and are able to drive on their national licence which again was obtained under very different circumstances. All these are the result of economic or political developments and decisions occurring at a level way above the individual driver and his responsibility.

And when the inevitable consequence is increased death and injury, are the above factors taken into consideration and the blame fairly apportioned and steps taken to remedy these deficiencies?
No. In their bureaucratic tunnel-vision, the authorities see (or want to see) only one problem: the driver. Just hammer him until you get the desired result. If the desired result happens, keep hammering him because it's obviously working. If the result doesn't happen, hammer him harder.
Is this a fair and reasonable response?

Well Put, they are definately set on Hammering and hammering and hammerring as much as possible, certainly makes you think about the mental state of those who choose to enforce this regime, well does me anyway

[vifferman]

The procedure for obtaining a licence has changed and the process is now considerably more involved, but it is debateable whether the actual standard of knowledge and skill is more demanding. And of course there is no on-going requirement for driver education once a full licence has been obtained.

Having helped put two of my three sons through driving tests, I would have to say that apart from being somewhat more standardised, the test is actually LESS demanding than 30 years ago, and is not an adequate test of someone's ability to handle a motor vehicle on the road. And you are quite right about on-going education. How many times do you see some f-wit who doesn't understand that your car won't explode if you drive on a flush median? Or who doesn't understand how roundabouts work? Or how to estimate following distances? Or that the 2-second rule becomes the 4-second rule in the wet?
Why isn't more money diverted from the ticketing revenue to educate drivers, rather than just try and bully/frighten them into complying with (sometimes inappropriate) speed limits? Apparently, the ads in Germany are actually intelligent and informative, and people actually watch them to brush up on skills and learn things. The ads here? A combination of shock tactics ( gore, splatter-fests, threats) and misinformation. Pathetic...

[James Deuce]

There have been plenty of injustices done in this country but not to the scale of what happened in Europe during the 1930's.

Parihaka was easily one of the most stomach churning events of 19th Century NZ. Scale isn't the issue. The will to crush babies heads with a Horse's hoof is. Shooting a pregnant woman in the belly is. It is just as evil and impersonal if one person dies at the hands of a government agency as described or one million die. Especially while the rest of the populace remains ignorant by choice or wilfully 100 years later.

[vifferman]

The major cause of accidents is the driver doing something inappropriate whether it be driving too fast for the conditions, not looking, etc. - in other words poor judgement.
.....So if there is some grain of truth in the above statement to reduce accidents substantially you have to target that poor judgement. And you do that by education. And of course that's not easy. It's not about knowing the road rules and how to drive a car, that bit is covered already. What you require is an attitude shift. Drivers need to recognise that they are fallible and that there are other road users who have the same rights that they do.But if you really want to make a difference then change the attitude of drivers.

BGD, you hit the nail squarely on the head here.
This is EXACTLY what I've been boring my family to death with for years now. And I recognise I myself have developed some bad attitudes to the privilege of driving on the road, and need to change that. But then I'm a fairly introspective person, and I'm well aware of what is at fault, what needs to change. The speed camera campaign hasn't challenged any of my beliefs or attitudes, because it's oversimplistic, unintelligent, and based on flawed logic and incorrect bald-faced lies and catch phrases.
"Speed Kills". Bullshit.
"If you're prepared to speed, you're a cold-blooded killer". Bullshit. I am a compassionate, warm and loving person, who sometimes exceeds the speed limit, when it's safe to do so, in a well-maintained, safe, modern car, designed to travel at twice the speed limit and equipped for emergency situations. Yes, it's still a risk. I accept that risk to myself, my family, and other road users. But it's the same (or lesser) risk as if I travel below the speed limit, become bored and drowsy, and don't stop for a rest. Are there any ads about that? It's the same (or lesser) risk as if I travel at the speed limit with a dirty windscreen, tired wiper blades in marginal weather. Or if my tyres are worn. Or my suspension's ferked. Or I have a headache. Or some plonker is out on the road after drinking alcohol. Or some eedjit is showing off to his mates. Or someone coming the other way has his driving lights on (wanker). Or someone's manhood is impugned by someone else passing him.

If people are bullied/frightened into complying with speed limits, it's not going to change their attitudes. Nor will pinging someone who inadvertantly drifts over the speed limit downhill on a safe piece of road and encounters a speed camera operator who is making the highways safer by punishing people who make a minor mistake.

Punishing people for speeding won't stop people following too closely, or those driving too fast for the conditions, or those who drive at 90 km/h mile after mile and force others to pass at an inappropriate place, or those who treat the road as a racetrack, or those who tow trailers and never pull over to let others past. It won't stop people driving through pedestrian crossings, or failing to indicate, or zigzagging from one lane to another on the motorway to save a few seconds of travel time. It doesn't address the attitudes of those wankers who think it's cool to have their driving lights on all the time. Or tailgaters. Or crapulent used Jap cars that aren't fit for our roads. Or the male Kiwi attitude that it's somehow an affront if people pass you, so everyone speeds up when there are passing lanes. These are ALL attitude problems, and NONE of these are addressed by the emphasis on speeding.

If the road toll is too high, and it's important, then find out what the problem really is, what ALL the contributing factors are, what it's going to cost to fix it properly, then fix it. Maybe the Gummint could use some of the money from 1 million tickets to fund a proper study into how to educate drivers so they're not a risk to themselves and other road users. Maybe they could use more than a third of the road tax for the purpose for which it was intended...

[spudchucka]

I will knock any damn policy I like, the current one is garbage and is only about money, end of story.

That is your opinion and I'll respect that however my opinion is that you are wrong, end of story.

Are you saying that the current scheme is not hairy arsed? are you saying it is realistic?

Go back and look at the facts and figures on the "police statistics" thread. The road toll has come down apart from a horror year in 2003. The policy does work and the policy makers don't give a stuff if folk like yourself don't like it.

all it does do is encourage dis respect for the HP and the police in general. Even non HP police would agree with that, the HP gives the police a bad name with its enforcment tactics.

Yes I agree that traffic enforcement does contribute to a general dissatisfaction towards the police. I would love to see a change to a separate traffic branch.

Within Police as a organisation, who gets the nice new cars? the flash warm jackets, the latest in equipment?? the HP does, Non HP members do have an attitude about it.

Yes they get nice cars. They also get funding from ACC etc to pay for the nice new cars. GDB cars get used and abused, they get used as battering rams, driven over gutters, go from being stone cold on a winters night to being reamed out on the way to an emergency. The HP car is the cops office and is only driven by one person. GDB cars are driven by one shift and then handed straight over to the next shift. They get blood and spew all through te back seat, the seats get ripped to bits by the cops duty belts, they clock up untold kms in no time because they are on the road 24 / 7. There are a heap of reasons why the HP cars are nicer than the GDB ones and not just as you imply because they are the "revenue collection" branch.

I personally dont think there is a problem with Road safety generally speaking

I guess that because you live in the Waikato that you have become accustomed to a high level of road carnage and are willing to accept unnecessary deaths on the road.

The only avenue for improvement is for advances in Car safety and road construction

This is another avenue for improvement but not the only one. Flash, modern cars with all the safety features have accident too and people die in them.

over empowered under paid "police IRD service" in cars that are designed to extract cash from the public at every opportunity WILL NOT CHANGE A THING EVER.

Ok then lets just stop policing the roads and see what happens.

And you are right, I shouldnt judge the entire HP based on a few indiviuals I should judge it for the organisation it is. A division of the IRD and that is the limitation of the respect I have for the HP who spend months training to scare the living shit out of people (flashing lights etc) for doing stuff all wrong.

You have the choice, like everyone does as to whether you want to contribute to the revenue collected through traffic enforcement. It isn't a cumpolsary "tax" imposed on all citizens, you choose whether you want to pay into that fund.

What is this crap statement about months of training to scare the living shit out of people with flashing lights? Get a bloody grip of yourself mate.

Now the real Police I have every respect for

So have I!

[spudchucka]

And the personal ID cards which were sold to NZers as Drivers licenses, which they are on the face of it but being DIGITAL they can be used for all soughts of things, next we will see other information being stored ie, relationship details, educational information,ethnic info, political info we are one step away from this being reality, this is fine no problem, BUT what this does is set a platform for those fools in Wellington to Creep in other things for example, what if the Government decided they wanted an ID card to be presented at all Buses or train stations "to prevent terrorisim" the card is already here, what then if it decided that because of a terrorist threat any one who belonged to a "certain political party" couldnt travel ??
I know this is a bit out there but its only a step away from current situations.

Nazi Germany decided it wanted to be able to identify Jews with the star of david, from this they crept in certain policys to restrict the jews abilities to carry out there lives in the fashion they had been accustomed to, and from there ,well we know the story.
At the end of the day ,I think this is a bit far fetched (like the jews did) but I would prefer not to empower the "political party of the day" with such information on the population.
The age of non privacy is on our door step, we will see this develop over time,
I dont want this happening at all.
So yes there are some similarities, they just arent as extreme (yet)

I don't want to start name calling here but jeez, you are sounding exremely paranoid there.

[Coldkiwi]

too right firestormer

wow, the germans have INFORMATIVE road ads??? what a concept? I can hardly imagine one!

i think even a shock and gore advert on the telly about tailgating would be damn useful. has ANYONE seen any ads/leaflets about that?

[jrandom]

i think even a shock and gore add about tailgating would be damn useful

Yes, but it would be more of a 'shock and expensive tail-light damage' ad.

[spudchucka]

There are valid points being made by both sides of this debate. It would be helpful in clarifying the issues if egos and the odd chip on the shoulder could be removed from the equation. Here's a slightly different perspective:

Economic and political considerations (most of which are or could be government-directed) have put more vehicles on the roads than before, not just in absolute numbers but per capita. The differential between the performance capabiliies of these modern vehicles and the standard of roading (and legal speed limits) is considerably greater than in the past. Investment in roading lags way behind other similar countries. The procedure for obtaining a licence has changed and the process is now considerably more involved, but it is debateable whether the actual standard of knowledge and skill is more demanding. And of course there is no on-going requirement for driver education once a full licence has been obtained. Recent immigration has put onto our roads a large number of drivers who were trained under very different conditions and have to adapt quickly to different rules, traffic flows and speeds. Overseas visitors and students arrive in large numbers and are able to drive on their national licence which again was obtained under very different circumstances. All these are the result of economic or political developments and decisions occurring at a level way above the individual driver and his responsibility.

And when the inevitable consequence is increased death and injury, are the above factors taken into consideration and the blame fairly apportioned and steps taken to remedy these deficiencies?
No. In their bureaucratic tunnel-vision, the authorities see (or want to see) only one problem: the driver. Just hammer him until you get the desired result. If the desired result happens, keep hammering him because it's obviously working. If the result doesn't happen, hammer him harder.
Is this a fair and reasonable response?

Thank you for your response, which by the way I do find to be fair & reasonable. I'm not going to say I support 100% hammering the driving public but we all know what will happen if we are caught. If the powers that be consider their efforts are making a difference then of course they will keep doing what they believe is working. If they suddenly backed off and made an announcement that "because the road toll is now at the desired level we will no longer be policing the roads at the same level" the road toll would be up in no time and they would have to start all over. Its human nature that when the pressure comes off we all go back to our old bad habits.

So the simple answer is, don't give them the opportunity to take your hard earned $$$ in the first place. If you get caught, take it on the chin and be more careful next time. Personally I think that is more than fair & reasonable.

[spudchucka]

Parihaka was easily one of the most stomach churning events of 19th Century NZ. Scale isn't the issue. The will to crush babies heads with a Horse's hoof is. Shooting a pregnant woman in the belly is. It is just as evil and impersonal if one person dies at the hands of a government agency as described or one million die. Especially while the rest of the populace remains ignorant by choice or wilfully 100 years later.

I agree, Parihaka was abhorent but how does that qualify comparing NZ today to Germany during the 30's?

[vifferman]

I guess part of it is the current ads have limited effectiveness because people are either annoyed by the stupidity of some of them, or can't identify with them. F'rinstance, the ads where Todd loses his license for speeding most people couldn't identify with, because they'd just go, "Yeah, but Todd's such a loser anyway (and so are his friends)."
In our household (with 2 teenagers and a 20 YO), Todd has become an object of mirth and even a new term for losers, as in: "Look at that car full of Todds", or "Don't be such a Todd!". It has no effect at all as far as it's message. Maybe they should change it to "Don't be a Todd!"

And the one with the two Falcons braking to a halt:
"But they're Aussies, so they can't drive anyway."
"What losers - they could see that truck from miles away - why didn't they swerve?"
"Don't drive a Falcon - they have shit brakes!"
"They're just ripping off the Matrix special effects."

[spudchucka]

"Speed Kills". Bullshit.

One more time for luck, hopefully it might start to sink in soon.

Crashes are caused by many factors. Speed is one of them, usually because it was innapropriate for the conditions.

However, speed is a major contributing factor to the trauma suffered as a result of a crash. Therefore I am afraid that speed does in fact kill. Especially when it is accompanied by stoppping extremeley quickly as is the case when vehicles colide.

If you don't believe me get your old maths and physics books from highschool out and go figure it out for yourselves. Alternatively go out and join one of the emergency services, police, fire, ambo and see for yourselves what happens to people in road crashes.

[Quasievil]

That is your opinion and I'll respect that however my opinion is that you are wrong, end of story.


Go back and look at the facts and figures on the "police statistics" thread. The road toll has come down apart from a horror year in 2003. The policy does work and the policy makers don't give a stuff if folk like yourself don't like it.
Well thats the latest year to pass, apart from the last two months of low deaths, no change?


Yes I agree that traffic enforcement does contribute to a general dissatisfaction towards the police. I would love to see a change to a separate traffic branch.
There is a seperate traffic branch its the highway patrol isnt it ?


Yes they get nice cars. They also get funding from ACC etc to pay for the nice new cars. GDB cars get used and abused, they get used as battering rams, driven over gutters, go from being stone cold on a winters night to being reamed out on the way to an emergency. The HP car is the cops office and is only driven by one person. GDB cars are driven by one shift and then handed straight over to the next shift. They get blood and spew all through te back seat, the seats get ripped to bits by the cops duty belts, they clock up untold kms in no time because they are on the road 24 / 7. There are a heap of reasons why the HP cars are nicer than the GDB ones and not just as you imply because they are the "revenue collection" branch.


I guess that because you live in the Waikato that you have become accustomed to a high level of road carnage and are willing to accept unnecessary deaths on the road.

Yes definately accustomed to high rates of road deaths, but I cant see the HP making any difference,fact is they arent if you look at the sign out front of the HP office


This is another avenue for improvement but not the only one. Flash, modern cars with all the safety features have accident too and people die in them.

True but improvements here will lead to lower safety


Ok then lets just stop policing the roads and see what happens.
I couldnt imagine that ever happening cause there is good money to be made


You have the choice, like everyone does as to whether you want to contribute to the revenue collected through traffic enforcement. It isn't a cumpolsary "tax" imposed on all citizens, you choose whether you want to pay into that fund.
I dont speed as a rule, Ive had one ticket in 4 years and that was 114 going down a hill on a 4 lane bit of road with no traffic around,revenue gathering!!

What is this crap statement about months of training to scare the living shit out of people with flashing lights? Get a bloody grip of yourself mate.

I have had conversations with people who have shit themselves seeing a HP car traveling up behind them lights and occasionally sirens on who have been quite shocked by it. I have also been in a HP car riding yellow lines to get through traffic at speed scaring the shit out of all around only to stop a mild traffic offender.
I have also been in a HP car where a car was stopped, the driver did not have a NZ valid license and a family of 5 including young children were turfed out of the car ,the car towed away and the family left on State 1 at 11.30am at night in winter where they remained for over an hour for a ride. The cop I was with is no longer a freind because of it.So yes they like the power of being able to scare people at "some " use it to the extreme, I know they do ,absolutely.

So have I!

I dont particulary want to lock horns with you Spud, I to respect your opinions and I think alot of them are valid, however I have an opinion and it to is valid (as far as Im concerned)
As you are a cop I do respect you, I think we need to agree to disagree on a few points , yes ?

[spudchucka]

I dont particulary want to lock horns with you Spud, I to respect your opinions and I think alot of them are valid, however I have an opinion and it to is valid (as far as Im concerned)
As you are a cop I do respect you, I think we need to agree to disagree on a few points , yes ?

No problem, if you want to leave it at that its fine with me. These arguements go around & around and often get nowhere. I'm not a HP cop and I never will be so at the end of the day its really no skin off my nose if people hate those guys. I'll agree that there are sadly some big time tossers in that section of the police but I honestly can say they are not the majority.