I can't see the problem with our road toll?

[swbarnett]

Or another way to see it is that its about one in 50 chance you'll die on the road given a lifetime of riding! Quik calc from - 400 killed out 20 000 yearly deaths from a 4 million pop yearly, x number of years likely on road.

To me a 2% chance of dying in a vehicle accident over my lifetime doesn't sound too bad. You've got to die of something.

These odds become less acceptable when we don't self reference but instead apply them to our family members.

Part of the problem we have is that the issue is looked at with too much emotion. The result of which is the "don't let Johny climb the tree or he'll fall" attitude.

To me it's not kosha that Kiwis have double the odds of a gorey death by others hands than people living in UK, Norway, much higher than even Oz... in fact many places . I object.

One problem with comparing us with other developed countries is that their population density is much higher. The length of road per capita is high in NZ and therefore we don't have as much money to throw at them.

Even worse - in 1990 our odds were similar to theirs (only 30% higher toll per capita then). No diminishing returns, Just slackness at high levels. Our toll would be down nearer 150 by 2010 had the Govt changed the draft transport policy per experts recommendations given to them 7 years ago. This was discussed with Cullen but he baulked.

Do you have details? It would be nice if it was possible to reduce the road toll without unduly draconion measures. I still maintain however that our road toll does not warrant the attention it gets in the public eye.

[grusomhat]

All you people discussing restricting fuel purchases. As much of a good idea it is it just wouldn't work very well.

Not everyone that comes into petrol stations are buying petrol for their cars. What about people filling containers for lawn mowers, bikes and what not?

Also the people who wouldn't be able to purchase it would be more inclined to go steal it out of their next door neighbors minivan.

Could probably work though with a few adjustments. I'm 'bout to go to work at BP. I'll see how many unrego'd vehicles I see.

[Swoop]

All you people discussing restricting fuel purchases.

Not everyone that comes into petrol stations are buying petrol for their cars. What about people filling containers for lawn mowers, bikes and what not?

Boats are another prime example...
Their "road tax" is paid for in the fuel that goes into the cage's tank!
Unfair = Yes!

[Delphinus]

I'm 'bout to go to work at BP. I'll see how many unrego'd vehicles I see.

Please keep us posted

[grusomhat]

Please keep us posted

Well I was only there for 2 hours today and it was sooo slow. Probably like 10 cars the whole time. I'm there for 8 hours tomorrow so I'll check again then.

[Grahameeboy]

And by that I mean, if your partner, or son, or sister, or father was killed in a vehicle accident that was completely avoidable, you'd be quite cool with that?

Reality is that any accident is not completly unavoidable and death is part of life.

Sometimes we spend more time working out how, why etc than we do grieving.

[The Stranger:Me]

One problem with comparing us with other developed countries is that their population density is much higher. The length of road per capita is high in NZ and therefore we don't have as much money to throw at them.

Another one is that the vehicle safety standards. We coincidentally lag the rest of the world here too.
For example we were told how bad we all were for killing ourselves and that we would have to slow down, but the govt didn't require side intrusion beams in cars (if memory serves correct they still don't) so the auto manufacturers omitted them for our market.
Yet another issue when comparing countries is, perhaps if the govt were more serious in shouldering some responsibility, as they do in other countries, instead of trying to push it all on to the drivers. The govt sticks it's head in the sand and shouts slow down.

[Katman]

Reality is that any accident is not completly unavoidable and death is part of life.

Sometimes we spend more time working out how, why etc than we do grieving.

I'm not talking about grieving after the event - I'm talking about avoiding the need to grieve in the first place. Of course people die in accidents and we can't ever expect a zero road toll, but to suggest "there is nothing wrong with our road toll" is bizarre in the extreme.

[homer]

Ok homer, what if it was your partner, or son, or sister, or father that was that 1 death in 6000. You'd be cool with that?

Hey close the curtains and stay indoors

[DEATH_INC.]

Then gradually replace traffic lights with round-abouts to make fail-to-yield accidents non fatal.

Bwa ha ha ha!!!!!
or in good ol' NZ you could replace all the roundabouts with lights and just issue speeding tickets....

[DEATH_INC.]

with rego/warrent, its "ok" for it to lapse for several days [ie, expires christmas day, but you cant get it done due to going away] but several YEARS without a current rego [i cant read wof stickers when on the fly, but stands to reason if one is out, so is the other] usually means theres something badly wrong with the car, owner cant afford to repair, so just doesnt get a wof cos they know the car would fail.

Maybe it means someone can't afford to register 3 farkin vehicles that you can't drive all at once on the road.....

[Sanx]

Bwa ha ha ha!!!!!
or in good ol' NZ you could replace all the roundabouts with lights and just issue speeding tickets....

Yes. More traffic lights are the answer to all NZ's road toll troubles. On a recent pootle into the Auckland city centre I timed the amount of time I spent waiting at red lights (was on the bike, so was filtering to the front each time) and the amount of time I spent actually moving. 12 minutes to get from Upper Queen St to Customs St. Ten minutes ten seconds spent at red lights. One minute 50 seconds spent moving. It took as long to get from my house in Mt Roskill to Upper Queen St as it did to go the rest of the way.

Traffic lights are an abomination and should be gas-axed on sight.

[McJim]

What if their death was avoidable?

All accidents are avoidable - look at your conception for instance...or the chances you would appear on this forum...these are accidents that many of us regret and yet what could we have done about them? Nothing. All that remains is to put you on ignore and leave it at that. Shame really.

[candor]

Part of the problem we have is that the issue is looked at with too much emotion. The result of which is the "don't let Johny climb the tree or he'll fall" attitude.

Do you have details? It would be nice if it was possible to reduce the road toll without unduly draconion measures. I still maintain however that our road toll does not warrant the attention it gets in the public eye.

Whats wrong with emotion about a 3 billion dollar drain. Its costing double the % of our gross domestic product of civilised countries in emergency service, lost earnings, welfare dependency, rehab, write offs etc etc than it does in some similar economies with similar geography and density.

Detaile re us falling behind when once we were on a par - see IRTAD database and the historic data in Motor vehicles crashes in NZ (M.O.T. web). Or did you mean details re how to reduce toll to 150 by 2010? Oops I meant reduce it by 150 ie to 300 (the official goal) by 2010.

Here - https://www.aa.co.nz/motoring/media/...Layout=Printer

Govt has just put this goal back to 2040 dealine. In other words plans complete inactivity on the subject apart from raising regos and gas so high that only Imperial BMW wielding State employees can contemplate wheels.

I agree it doesn't warrant the public attention it gets, but not because its not important - more because the fat juicy contracts ad agencies get produce no net impact on the toll (Duignan report for MOT 2007). Total scam and the Govt knows this, but the gravy train rolls on. Mainly the ads justify driving taxes in peoples minds, so they're seen as being worth it.

Called "engineering consent" it is. Starting to see this happening with Govt friendly media now putting out stories slanted to show how well the smacking law is supposedly working.

Also our media has to navel gaze a bit because not too much happens here of note. Road Safety like politician clowns provides easy stock formula copy.

[Ocean1]

With regards to engineered solutions this says it all really:

Currently motorists pay 53 cents in tax for every litre of petrol they buy, with only 13 cents going on roading.

I wonder what percentage of GDP we spend per kilometer traveled compared to other comparable countries. I also wonder how that figure has changed historically.

Its costing double the % of our gross domestic product of civilised countries in emergency service, lost earnings, welfare dependency, rehab, write offs etc etc than it does in some similar economies with similar geography and density.

No statistical proof at all, but I suspect any comparative deterioration in our accident rates may well have at least some correlation with the introduction of ACC. In any rational insurance market the price of the cover is closely linked to the risk of the insured party. Here it’s not, high risk combinations of vehicles and drivers pay a pittance compared to the true cost of their driving activities. Overseas a young driver with a poor record attempting to purchase a high performance vehicle would find that not only would the insurance cost be unaffordable, the whole deal would be simply impossible. No insurance = no purchase.

Unfair? Hell no, the real world does impose penalties for unsafe behaviour, a lesson we go to great lengths to avoid teaching our kids. Even a group considered to be low risk would find that the purchase price of a Porsche 911 or a GSXR1300 was only the beginning of the cost of owning one. Bin either once or twice and you might well find yourself uninsurable, and therefore ineligible to drive it. These are the real-world costs of the higher-end risk groups. Who’s paying them here?