Nearly busted for flashing

[swbarnett]

I have the theory that if you flash to warn other road users theres a traffic unit up the road YOU ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE ROAD TOLL !!!!! Sounds harsh ???? think about it before you throw that statement out.........

I can understand your reasoning but, with all due respect, I think you've got it wrong.

The speeders rely on their radar detectors and oncomming drivers to warn them theres a cop up the road, slow down for it and then up their speed again.

Very true.

We all know (aspecially me being an ax ambulance officer) the increased carnage that even a slight increase in speed can cause in an impact.

Also true. However, you've got to have an impact first.

Warning other road users to slow it down is not only legally wrong ... its morally wrong and irresponsible too.

I think it's been said elsewhere that that doesn't stand up in court.

I only flash my lights at oncomming traffic if theres a HAZARD up the road to slow them down.

Ahh, but a cop with a radar gun is a hazard.

[TimeOut]

Ahh, but a cop with a radar gun is a hazard.[/QUOTE]

Very true

[Highlander]

...When was the last time anyone saw the police seriously police intersection laws? Never is when, ....

Often see them in force at intersections. One watching the lights radioing his associates when the lights change. They are just round the corner pulling up the vehicles that failed to stop as the lights indicate they should. Good on them.

[Soul.Trader]

Ummmm speed dont kill. Crapdriving kills. If sombody is goign to crash at 120 they will crash at 100 just the same.

Yes, but when they crash into your family coming the other way, the carnage will be substantially worse at 120.

[Mikkel]

Often see them in force at intersections. One watching the lights radioing his associates when the lights change. They are just round the corner pulling up the vehicles that failed to stop as the lights indicate they should. Good on them.

Awesome. I have never seen that here in Chch unfortunately. That's something I'd like to see though...

[McDuck]

Yes, but when they crash into your family coming the other way, the carnage will be substantially worse at 120.

Yes but it still takes a person to cross the center line...

[scumdog]

Yes but it still takes a person to cross the center line...

And NZ is littered with incompetents that have an inability to stay on their side of the road..

[onearmedbandit]

Incompetents? I want your badge number or this goes, well I don't need to say do I.

[McDuck]

or this gos international.

[Ixion]

Yes, but when they crash into your family coming the other way, the carnage will be substantially worse at 120.

And the carnage at 100 will be substantially worse than at 80. Which in tunr will be worse tha n at 60. And so on.

So where's your red flag then ?

I'm still waiting for the first one of the "Ohh ohh speed kills oh oh " bleaters to have the guts to actually stand by the crap they spout and tell us that they sold their bike and got a moped.

Because if they REALLY believed it, they wouldn't have a vehicle capable of over 50 kph would they?

Somehow I think I'll be waiting a long time. What's that word again, begins with 'H', on the tip of my tongue - hippopotamus ? No that's not it.

[Jantar]

And the carnage at 100 will be substantially worse than at 80. Which in tunr will be worse tha n at 60. And so on.....

The propoganda is actually worse than that. At the safeAs seminars 18 months ago, the LTSA spin merchants claimed that there is a 4% drop in fatalities for every 1 kmh drop in average road speed. So if we bring the speeds down from the current 105 kmh to 80 km there will be no more road deaths.

[Mikkel]

The propoganda is actually worse than that. At the safeAs seminars 18 months ago, the LTSA spin merchants claimed that there is a 4% drop in fatalities for every 1 kmh drop in average road speed. So if we bring the speeds down from the current 105 kmh to 80 km there will be no more road deaths.

You have got to love statistics!

How about dropping it to 60 km/h to improve population growth?

[swbarnett]

The propoganda is actually worse than that. At the safeAs seminars 18 months ago, the LTSA spin merchants claimed that there is a 4% drop in fatalities for every 1 kmh drop in average road speed. So if we bring the speeds down from the current 105 kmh to 80 km there will be no more road deaths.

Although I agree with the point of your post I think you'll find that the percentage is cumulative i.e. if the death toll is 400 a 25kph drop in speed (they claim) would drop it to 144 not 0.

The stupid thing is that by their own reasoning at an average speed of 0kph there'll still be 5.5 road deaths if you start at 105kph with 400.

[Jantar]

OK, Try these statistics.

In the early 1970s, as a result of the 1973 oil shock, both New Zealand and the United States imposed new, lower speed limits in an effort to save fuel. In New Zealand’s case the limit dropped from 60 mph (100ks) to 50mph (80ks), while in the US it dropped to 55 mph - the so-called "double nickel".

In the ten years leading up to the drop in the New Zealand speed limit, an average of 608 New Zealanders had died on the roads each year.

In the ten years that followed the drop from 100 kph down to 80 kph, an average of 707 New Zealanders died on the roads each year: in other words, the new, lower New Zealand speed limit coincided with a 17% increase in road deaths.

[fredie]

this is big time . we heard the news here in aussie. its going global