Police are planning...

[spudchucka]

NZ polices are the most stupid ones i ever seen, they only know how to write tickets. Awaste of our taxation. Driving big fat Holden running around. dont make any sense to crime and safety of community.

I was trying to think of a suitable rsponse to this but really it just isn't worth the effort.

[spudchucka]

I've wondered about this myself. I've always taken my tickets with a smile and accepted the fine and wouldn't bother disputing the speed if I genuinely knew I was speeding. But what if an unscrupulous HP with a grudge against the whole damn world or whatever pings one speedster and then books the next 5 cars off the same reading? Its already been stated on another thread that HP don't have to show you the read out. Can those in the business shed some light on this? Is there a time stamp on the readings. Even then its his word against yours on the time elapsed.

It is considered "best practice" to lock the speed and offer the offending driver the opportunity to see the readout. However this is not a requirement, all the officer needs to do is see the readout and visually identify the offending vehilce. The in-car radars have a hand held remote that allows the operator to transmit, hold and lock / release readings on the radar, they are completely idiot proof to operate.

The practice you describe would fall squarely into the realms of police coruption. Any officer exposed doing this would be in more shit than Ned Kelly!! It just isn't worth it. Sure there will always be some who are corrupt and play dirty but in todays police environment they get weeded out pretty quickly.

[MikeL]

The practice you describe would fall squarely into the realms of police coruption. Any officer exposed doing this would be in more shit than Ned Kelly!! It just isn't worth it. Sure there will always be some who are corrupt and play dirty but in todays police environment they get weeded out pretty quickly.

Having travelled extensively and lived overseas in countries where police corruption (as well as brutality) is endemic, I have always felt pride on returning to N.Z. in the relative integrity of our police force. In recent years I feel that this integrity has been dented somewhat through some well-publicised revelations which have made me wonder whether my faith was misplaced. The difficulty for a layman is to know whether a few high-profile cases (or anecdotal evidence for that matter) represent just the tip of the iceberg, or the whole iceberg. I'm prepared to give the police the benefit of the doubt, but what I would like to know, Spud, is what makes you so confident that the rotten ones get weeded out quickly.

[Milky]

Fair enough if they intend to introduce harder policing of intersections etc because there are heaps of poor driving habits displayed at intersections, (some people here have even suggested this should be done). Any way if that is the intention I would support it wholeheartedly.

I agree in that the main cause of crashes in Akl (from my point of view - being a commuter during the week) seems to be people following too dammed close, not driving to the conditions or taking their eyes off the road. Dont get me started on red light runners, non stoppers at stop signs, people failing to give way etc... If urban traffic policing is primarily about ensuring traffic flow and safety of motorists, then this is where the emphasis needs to be placed. Granted there are other times and places where speed is a much greater factor in crashes, so the balance should be shifted for those areas that need it more.

In town it pisses me off to have cop cars tailgate me in the hope that I will pull out a gap and exceed the speed limit by doing so... It isn't where the enforcement should be placed, and this method is definitely not going to win friends for the police

This is purely based on what I observe as a commuter, so feel free to correct my perceptions on police resource appropriation or spread of tickets :spudwhat:

[KATWYN]

I don't know how they expect to get those extra speeding tickets because where I work in the last 2 - 3 years it has become increasingly harder to find people speeding. My own personal assessment, from what I see every day is that most people sit around 55 - 58 kph in town. I don't spend a lot of time in 100kph areas but when I do I see people by and large sticking to around 98 - 105kph.

Fair enough if they intend to introduce harder policing of intersections etc because there are heaps of poor driving habits displayed at intersections, (some people here have even suggested this should be done). Any way if that is the intention I would support it wholeheartedly.

Sometimes, I find myself looking at the speedometer too often to maintain the speed limit im doing cos it is so easy to exceed it (especially around 50km areas) - my thoughts are, that if everyone is doing this, they are not looking where they should be...at the road... or what is happening around them...and I think that now speed fines etc are being stepped up, this is going to become a serious issue which may start causing more accidents (people looking at speedo's more than the road - its pretty hard to keep within 10km without looking regulary at the vehicle speedo)

I know when I look at the speedometer, there is "a split second" situation where i'm not watching the road...

What I noticed one day going into Orewa recently, was a large lit up sign that was showing the speed of incoming drivers, so they could gauge their speed without looking at their speedo, that was a really good idea.

[modalx]

The point I am trying to make, though it appears I have not done very well, is that we should be thinking a lot more about the way we police speed. The hostile, defensive reaction that comes from the establishment (yes spud, thats you) when someone suggests something different is amazing if predictable. I have been deliberately provocative because it irritates me to hear the same oversimplistic dogma spouted again and again. The standard reaction to any suggestion the status quo might not be the best thing, seems to be to immediately call the detractor an anti-social maniac with homicidal tendancies. Or a cockhead (check back spud - Alzheimers?)

To be clear, what I am suggesting is the kind of "Reasonable and Prudent" approach that worked in Montana and is working in Germany, or at the very least, increased tolerance in appropriate circumstances.

Spud is sure that there is evidence that policing the limit reduces accidents - not so. Check out LTSAs own data.
Injury accidents have gone up from 194 per 100,000 to 234 per 100,000 people since 2000
The LTSA often uses stats per 100,000 vehicles and they generally look good - why ? because the country is being flooded with imported cars many of which don't kill people because they are parked up somewhere as a second car.

Fatal accidents have reduced but the trend has been very steadily downward since 1970 and so quite likely nothing to do with policing speed but better roads, better cars and very importantly better medicine. We are far better at salvaging badly damaged people than we were say 6 years ago.

Before spud jumps to conclusions again, I am not saying speed is irrelevant. These are just a couple of examples of the way we are misled by stats and how dangerous it is to assume our own experience is anything more than that.

I am also suggesting that the 100kph limit has indeed been plucked out of the air and has absolutely no validity. The magic number is only 100 because of history and what road users will accept. Spud brought up the crash tests done on cars as some kind of evidence. Standard offset frontal crash tests are done at 40mph and at that speed the crush zone is right to the windscreen and the engine is under the car. The same test at 100kph would result in total destruction of the vehicle and very likely the occupants too. So these tests would suggest a 40mph limit is too high. Such a high proportion of motorcyclists die in crashes at 100kph that a higher limit is probably irrelevant in terms of fatality after a crash.

What you do have at 100 compared to 120 is more time. At least theoretically. In fact, a huge number of other factors affect the time you have including, importantly, your state of alertness. You can halve your reaction time by being alert. The Montana study has some interesting conclusions about how taking more responsibility for your speed (ie not robotically sticking to an artificial limit) improves your alertness.

As for the injury reduction argument - of course it is true that the slower you go the smaller the mess. If we all travelled at 50kph there would be fewer injuries but is that really helpful? It is certainly no argument for a 100kph limit in view of the fact that even with a seatbelt and airbag, it's almost impossible to survive a direct collision with a fixed object or slow-moving vehicle if you're going 100kph.

So the issue is about deciding the level of risk we are willing to accept.

The problem is that we are jumping straight to a very imperfect solution with a blanket speed limit. It seems to me self evident that speed is NEVER the only cause of a crash. There are ALWAYS other factors and this means that a rigidly enforced speed limit is hopelessly flawed. But it is a nice simple rule and people do like to oversimplify things so they don't have to think much. It is also easy to police. Thus we get the line up of HP along Karapiro where the engineering, visibilty, run-off and so on makes for low risk driving and people tend to go a bit over the limit.

Travelling above 100kph in these situations would not substantially increase the TOTAL RISK of a crash. Yes it would increase the risk of dying in the crash but we have already accepted a level of risk is inevitable and you are pretty much buggered at 100 anyway. The increased risk of dying is offset by the low risk of having a crash in the first place. This is why we accept air travel. You will definitely die if you crash at 700kph but the risk is finite and small.

As much as some people would like this issue to be black and white it is not. The current drive towards tighter enforcement of the 100kph limit is not rational and will result in many more fines, much more public anger and minimal change in behaviour and even less in the desired outcomes. I think we should be bold, do what Montana did and decide on some indicators for Reasonable and Prudent speed. But I'm a realist and know lots of people are not ready for that much trust so would settle for plenty of tolerance.

Good god that was a mission. For anybody still reading, I apologise

[scumdog]

Part of the reason for the rise in injuries is that until the last few years most minor injuries were never reported, (probably 'cause it saved the cops time/paper work!) the desk-jockey types realised that if more injuries were reported the rise in injuries would be met with more money from ACC to prevent said injuries.
Whatever the speed limit there would still be people that would drive faster than the limit, like a lot of the others I would have no problem with getting a speed ticket - had one in my life and paid up. (Didn't with the one I got in Canada and now I'm a fugitive from the law, a desperado! )

If I can keep to the speed limit and/or dodge the "revenue gatherers" as much as I have over the last 35 years then hopefully most of the rest of you can eh?

[scumdog]

NZ polices are the most stupid ones i ever seen, they only know how to write tickets. Awaste of our taxation. Driving big fat Holden running around. dont make any sense to crime and safety of community.

Go back to school, you are in dire need of an education!!!!!!!!!!
(Reminds me of that expression "depriving a village somewhere of its idiot")

[madandy]

My 1997 Primera can stop from 120km/h in less distance than my first car, a 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma could from 100km/h.I know my RF will haul up much better than my old GS650 Katana ever did.
Tyre improvements increase control and also reduce lock-up potential not to mention ABS and advances in the all important suspension.

Technology has made a difference...on paper.

Statistics (and perhaps Police training) are being manipulated to suit the attitude that driver education is too expensive...so slow down...

[denill]

Good god that was a mission. For anybody still reading, I apologise

Nah, don't apologise. Just get a decision making job with the LTSA.

They could do with a dose of objective assessment.

[Milky]

wow... that took a while to read much like what I was trying to get across but with me being inarticulate and lazy, mine never came out as that
However I would like to add that the problem with speed limits is that they dont take into account the changing road conditions. As you say

"...Thus we get the line up of HP along Karapiro where the engineering, visibilty, run-off and so on makes for low risk driving and people tend to go a bit over the limit..."

Would anyone here even consider doing the same speed (100 to 110) on the old arthurs pass road, twilight road etc??? it is still legal, but by far the more dangerous one of the two, and much more likely to lead to an injury or death. Seems we will just have to live with the regulations, and take those annoying 111kmh tickets on the chin...:disapint:

[sAsLEX]

Good god that was a mission. For anybody still reading, I apologise

Well put, no need to apologise

[spudchucka]

I'm prepared to give the police the benefit of the doubt, but what I would like to know, Spud, is what makes you so confident that the rotten ones get weeded out quickly.

The police hierachy want to be seen as being cleaner than clean. Any practice by members of police that involves dishonhesty is taken extremely seriously. Making up traffic offences puts the cop in a position where he / she has to be prepared to commit purgery. As a cop you never want to put yourself in a position where you would have to lie in Court as this would be the ultimate disgrace and the end of your career.

[spudchucka]

I agree in that the main cause of crashes in Akl (from my point of view - being a commuter during the week) seems to be people following too dammed close, not driving to the conditions or taking their eyes off the road. Dont get me started on red light runners, non stoppers at stop signs, people failing to give way etc... If urban traffic policing is primarily about ensuring traffic flow and safety of motorists, then this is where the emphasis needs to be placed. Granted there are other times and places where speed is a much greater factor in crashes, so the balance should be shifted for those areas that need it more.

In town it pisses me off to have cop cars tailgate me in the hope that I will pull out a gap and exceed the speed limit by doing so... It isn't where the enforcement should be placed, and this method is definitely not going to win friends for the police

This is purely based on what I observe as a commuter, so feel free to correct my perceptions on police resource appropriation or spread of tickets :spudwhat:

I agree that other areas require harder policing as you describe. However it will always be appropriate to police speed as well because, as stated many times over, it is a trauma promoting factor in crashes.

[spudchucka]

Sometimes, I find myself looking at the speedometer too often to maintain the speed limit im doing cos it is so easy to exceed it (especially around 50km areas) - my thoughts are, that if everyone is doing this, they are not looking where they should be...at the road... or what is happening around them...and I think that now speed fines etc are being stepped up, this is going to become a serious issue which may start causing more accidents (people looking at speedo's more than the road - its pretty hard to keep within 10km without looking regulary at the vehicle speedo)

I know when I look at the speedometer, there is "a split second" situation where i'm not watching the road...

What I noticed one day going into Orewa recently, was a large lit up sign that was showing the speed of incoming drivers, so they could gauge their speed without looking at their speedo, that was a really good idea.

I'm not having a go at you and I know as well it can be difficult to keep sports bikes at the 50kph speed limit but being able to maintain a constant speed without continually looking at the speedo is a pretty basic skill. Personally I can tell my speed pretty much bang on by the pitch of the engine, the sound of my tyres etc and don't need to more than glance at the speedo occasionally.