Hamilton Safe As - 27-07-2006

[The Stranger:Me]

Isn't that how it works now?

A demerit falls off after a certain amount of time?

I think the biggest problem with "Good" points being used to offset bad, then what, you give way to a cop 5 times, puts you in credit so you can get off a speeding fine, drunk driving, or killing someone?

I agree in principal, but don't like the idea of the two being connected.

My opinion, will stop now.

Man, your opinions are greatly appreciated, don't stop.

I am just looking for a way to offer/implement a reward system with some real value to it. If the value is not significant then I feel it will be ignored.

Same thing happens with the punishment system. If it is of little consequence people just ignore it.

But as I see it I would rather they increase the positive than increase the negative.

[sAsLEX]

Oh, and in this context young means under 25

So what they going to take my license away!? (ie please elaborate on how the plan to do over us young people? ) Fuck me I joined the Defence force at 17 and could quite rightly of been sent to war with a rifle a pistol to defend this country yet they want to toughen up laws to make driving hard for young people yet they still are pleased to ship us off to defend the country!?

I mean I have mates who drive around 600 million dollar warships that aint 25, I think the focus on age is wrong, young people can drive it aint exactly the hardest thing about and alot of young people are mature enough to handle the responsibility that goes with it. Sadly as is often the case, few are ruining it for many!

[Squeak the Rat]

Man, your opinions are greatly appreciated, don't stop.

I am just looking for a way to offer/implement a reward system with some real value to it. If the value is not significant then I feel it will be ignored.

Same thing happens with the punishment system. If it is of little consequence people just ignore it.

But as I see it I would rather they increase the positive than increase the negative.

Much like the insurance these days....you don't lose your no-claims bonus if you make a claim if you've been claim free for so many years.... Prevents me claiming for stupid things...

Trouble is they will argue that having merit points will encourage you to speed as you know you will get away with it..... How could this be counter-argued?

[Squeak the Rat]

So what they going to take my license away!? (ie please elaborate on how the plan to do over us young people? )

New learners not able to get their learners licence until 17 or older.

Or, how about this:

Restrictions on engine size based on age (ie 25) as well as experience. No 600cc (or even 400cc) sports bike until your 26.....

Or, how about this:

ACC fees relative to representation in injury stats. Your ACC fees go up on your rego, once for being a biker and again for being young.

Enough?

That's why we need to fight this. It's for a 2010 strategy. What gets decided NOW gets implemented over the next few years. Come to the meetings, post on the website (the easy-as one), email the minister etc etc etc.....

[John Banks]

I like the idea of having people with clean licences paying less on their rego - the less dangerous, the less ACC fees you should have to pay. The only problem is then someone with a 'gold' or whatever licence can go around buying all his mates regos, so something would have to be done about that.
As for offsetting merit points against demerit points, I don't think that rewarding good behaivour with bad will go down very well.

[Ozzie]

Man, your opinions are greatly appreciated, don't stop.

I am just looking for a way to offer/implement a reward system with some real value to it. If the value is not significant then I feel it will be ignored.

Same thing happens with the punishment system. If it is of little consequence people just ignore it.

But as I see it I would rather they increase the positive than increase the negative.

True enough.

Biggest flaw in the whole merit / demerit thing is that most of the little F*ckers that are killing/dieing don't have a license anyway, so it will have no impact, other than for those of us that have rego, and a license and are generally law abiding.

Now not to say none of us cause or die in these sorts of statistical groupings, but if you look at the tables, it is rarely fully licensed drivers

So, we need to get the unlicensed off the roads, and better police/improve the skills and education of the learners and restricted (with the obvious except of N).

[Ozzie]

ACC fees relative to representation in injury stats. Your ACC fees go up on your rego, once for being a biker and again for being young.

Have a look here, and vote.

ACC is over charged to us, I think it should be on an individual basis, the same as any other insurance.

[Ozzie]

I like the idea of having people with clean licences paying less on their rego - the less dangerous, the less ACC fees you should have to pay. The only problem is then someone with a 'gold' or whatever licence can go around buying all his mates regos, so something would have to be done about that.
As for offsetting merit points against demerit points, I don't think that rewarding good behaivour with bad will go down very well.

There is always a work around that some folk will employ, but I tell you, if I got a gold license for not speeding, registered my mates car, he sped through a speed camera, and I got pinged and lost my gold status, I'd be pretty pissed.

[Ozzie]

We should get this thread moved before any red rep starts flowing for it being in the wrong place.

How do we do that?

[The Stranger:Me]

Much like the insurance these days....you don't lose your no-claims bonus if you make a claim if you've been claim free for so many years.... Prevents me claiming for stupid things...

Exactly, there comes a point where you weigh up the value and the insurance companies are obviously finding benefit in finding that point now, as you are.

Trouble is they will argue that having merit points will encourage you to speed as you know you will get away with it..... How could this be counter-argued?

My counter would be a flat no.
It is an attitude change we are after. If I have amassed 20 demerit points by being clean for say 10 yrs (don't forget I got older and wiser during this time too) I am not going to just say oh the hell with it lets go blow it. I will be in a pattern by now, I am likely to transgress, but not go ape.

So when I get a ticket for towing my boat trailer at 93kmh (real world example, fuck I am so bad) I can at least get some satisfaction.

[Squeak the Rat]

Good logic CaN. I'm just concerned that logic isn't the MoT's bag!

We should get this thread moved before any red rep starts flowing for it being in the wrong place.

More to the point, it's probably off the radar for every one who isn't still interested anyway.

[sAsLEX]

I like the idea of having people with clean licences paying less on their rego - the less dangerous, the less ACC fees you should have to pay.

Why?

Does alot of points mean you cost more to ACC? No.

Does speeding, according to govt, actually result in increased ACC costs? No.


Being old does increase your danger to others, but are they going to incrementally increase the rego as your age increases and your reflexes go down?

[Squeak the Rat]

Why?

Does alot of points mean you cost more to ACC? No.

Yes in a risk perspective, you have proven you break the law more often and therefore are more of a safety risk. Obviously this would have to assume that risky driving was targeted, not the current 111kph thinking.

Does speeding, according to govt, actually result in increased ACC costs? No.

Yes it does. The bigger the speed the bigger the mess, according to the govt.

Being old does increase your danger to others, but are they going to incrementally increase the rego as your age increases and your reflexes go down?

Stats show it's the young that are the problem. Stats do not show old drivers anywhere near as dangerous as young hooligans....

[Ozzie]

Why?

Does alot of points mean you cost more to ACC? No.

Does speeding, according to govt, actually result in increased ACC costs? No.


Being old does increase your danger to others, but are they going to incrementally increase the rego as your age increases and your reflexes go down?

I think the points system relative to ACC costs should remain as it is, ie. no impact.

However, you should start off on a common low charge for registration, which will increase in cost for each injury or death related accident you are the "Cause" of.

It should work as a third party personal insurance (NSW Pink Slip), compulsary for rego (like the WOF), and like other vehicle insurance, you must name other drivers of the vehicle (mass penalty for failing to disclose).

[Ozzie]

Stats show it's the young that are the problem. Stats do not show old drivers anywhere near as dangerous as young hooligans....

Actually, the two largest contibuting age groups are the 15 - 25 year, and 60 +, so in effect the young and dumb and the old and stupid are being subsidised by the rest (if you take those at risk of injury should pay vote).

I think that whole approach sucks the kumera, more peds get killed than bikers, how is ACC being charged to them.....Maybe we should introduce sneaker registration.....

I know that is silling, but the whole thing stinks more than the average biker boots.