Harry Duynhoven

[Lou Girardin]

Article in the Star-Times quotes Harry Duynhoven as wanting higher speed limits on roads that can support them. He asks, "is it rational to have a 100 km/h limit on long, clear, straight roads?"
He's asked the speed management team to look at better ways to to control speed and driver behaviour, including making drivers keep left when not overtaking.
He says that speed cameras are costing public support, a big chunk of the public see it as nothing but revenue collecting.

So. if this happens, I'll look forward to comments from certain members of this forum who think it's better to sit on their fat butts than try to change anything. No doubt they'll continue to travel at 100 km/h in the interests of 'trauma reduction'.
As if!

[TLDV8]

"is it rational to have a 100 km/h limit on long, clear, straight roads?"

In a perfect world common sense would prevail as far as speed limits go,at the end of most straights there will be a corner........there lies the problem.

[Bonez]

In a perfect world common sense would prevail as far as speed limits go,at the end of most straights there will be a corner........there lies the problem.

Agreed and those folk that have returned to m/c after many years absence, reliving their youth, and purchased these modern rocketships realise just how slow their reactions have become.

[FROSTY:Me]

ohh yea -i can vouch for that.

[MacD]

I recently spent 3 weeks driving around the UK and was reasonably impressed with their approach to speed limits. There is the standard motorway and dual carriage-way limit of 70 mph, single carriage-way of 60mph and built-up area limit of 30mph. However there also seemed to be a lot of urban areas with 40 mph or even 50 mph limits where it was reasonable for the type of road. On the other hand there were 20mph limits through small villages.

It seems to me that applying an appropriate speed limit is an important step towards getting people to actually comply with speed limits, rather than just sending them a bill in the mail after the event?

Perhaps Harry Duynhoven is showing some signs of actually thinking about the issues!?

[Lou Girardin]

I'm sorry if I upset anyone with that post. What I should have said was "those members that sit on their fat butts and actively discourage anyone from trying to change anything."

[jrandom]

I'm sorry if I upset anyone with that post. What I should have said was "those members that sit on their fat butts and actively discourage anyone from trying to change anything."

Well, rather. I mean, your original description covered about 90% of KBers, myself included, if you equate "thinking it's better to..." with observable behaviour.

But I don't quite know who you're talking about regarding "actively discouraging". Surely not our local potato-hurling policeman again.

[Hitcher]

Surely not our local potato-hurling policeman again.

People who inhabit glass houses shouldn't either.

[Jackrat]

So Lou,does your logic extend in the other direction, or would that not allow you to air your chip on the shoulder.
Oh sorry,It's the Gov'ts fault,nothing to do with speed,Right!!

[TLDV8]

I'm sorry if I upset anyone with that post. What I should have said was "those members that sit on their fat butts and actively discourage anyone from trying to change anything."

I certainly was not upset (i have no idea who Harry Duynhoven is come to think of it ?)...... but...As most know Speed Limits and most rules in general are based on the lowest denominator,along the lines of it only takes one to !@#$ it for the rest.......What should the speed limit be? that would be easy based on common sense,Perhap's the problem is not a number but the dismal driving abilities of the average punter behind the wheel?.....Lets take mine and many others beloved homeland,Auckland..probably some of the worst drivers in the country,who at the best of times struggle at driving in straight lines down the motorway or keeping any kind safe following distance etc etc......Shock Horror it gets worse,come the Weekend..and there is a fairly good posibility of that same "City Driver/Rider" actually leaving the city and heading out onto the open road ......OMG now you have to think... go around corners... evaluate the driving conditions... even overtake other vehicles with the added bonus of other oncoming vehicles.......imagine if the posted limit was 120kph on the open road or even better it really was based on common sense .......The whole thing is a Catch 22....if you sign post a speed camera fixed or mobile ,you slow down untill passing it,but not much is gained......when there is the risk of getting pinged by a concealed Camera ( 115kph in the middle of nowhere!!!) then perhaps the limit will be adhered to (for a bit)....... In the end it comes down to driver education and skills learned,some drivers are dangerous in a parking lot let alone out on the road...

Ohh no...... just read the above posts ......could this thread be the Kiwi version of Gixxer.com? .....

[jrandom]

People who inhabit glass houses shouldn't...

... hurl potatoes?

Unless they're mashed, I suppose.

[Lou Girardin]

So Lou,does your logic extend in the other direction, or would that not allow you to air your chip on the shoulder.
Oh sorry,It's the Gov'ts fault,nothing to do with speed,Right!!

Sorry, I don't follow. What direction are you referring to?

[spudchucka]

Article in the Star-Times quotes Harry Duynhoven as wanting higher speed limits on roads that can support them. He asks, "is it rational to have a 100 km/h limit on long, clear, straight roads?"
He's asked the speed management team to look at better ways to to control speed and driver behaviour, including making drivers keep left when not overtaking.
He says that speed cameras are costing public support, a big chunk of the public see it as nothing but revenue collecting.

So. if this happens, I'll look forward to comments from certain members of this forum who think it's better to sit on their fat butts than try to change anything. No doubt they'll continue to travel at 100 km/h in the interests of 'trauma reduction'.
As if!

You forgot to mention that in the same article Harry said he would like to see strick enforcement of a 110 kph speed limit, sounds very much like what we have now.

[spudchucka]

I'm sorry if I upset anyone with that post. What I should have said was "those members that sit on their fat butts and actively discourage anyone from trying to change anything."

Firstly, you have no idea how fat my butt is.

Secondly, I'm not discouraging anyone from trying to change things, just highlighting how feable your attempts are.

By the way, what a load of crap you spoke in another recent thread about abusing other members who dissagree with you.

[badlieutenant]

sigh...........everyone grab a rock.........
the speed limit has been the same for a few years now. The only thing thats changed is the ability to enforce these rules (i.e technology). If getting a ticket is revenue grabing then they've been at it a while, only now they are a lot better at it. I hate getting tickets and i hate demerit points. But them the rules, gotta live by them or be prepared to pay fines.
Lou, was this thread started just so spud or marty would bite ? Im curious, not that ive gota problem with that Ive had a good laugh at some of the to-ings and fro-ings, keep it up. makes a dull night interesting.
one more thing, wasnt public support damaged more by things like the springbok tourthan road safety revenue grabing ? everyone remember the red squad ?