Lower Speed Limits

**jimbo600** · 3rd January 2005, 08:22

Hey all check this out

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?...jectID=9005392

Now would this be an attempt to boost takings as people are driving slower these days and therefore HP are making less moolah. What about putting the limit up on some stretches of road. When will it end? 40Kmh over the whole country? Hey I know let's not go out at all.

I saw on another thread that more pedestrians got killed than bikes in 2004. Let's ban walking too.

Bloody hell

**Coyote** · 3rd January 2005, 08:26

Nightmares do come true

**Monsterbishi** · 3rd January 2005, 08:28

Geez man, harden up already, even if they dropped a 50kph zone to 40kph, it would only add, on average, 90 seconds to your journey.

They're doing it to save lives, what better reason dya need?

**Coyote** · 3rd January 2005, 08:30

Originally Posted by Article

Last year's toll was 435, which was 26 fewer than in 2003 but seven per cent higher than a 40-year low achieved in 2002.

Bloody Hell. If the '40 year low' was achieved in 1976, they would've said we have to work toward that

**Posh Tourer :P** · 3rd January 2005, 08:57

Yep, it sounds like the twisty areas will be the ones with lower speed limits......

How about better driver training? Or is that too hard to do?

**Deano** · 3rd January 2005, 08:58

Speed limits ?

Is that when you've got your bike on the limiter in top gear ?

What if you're drunk and speeding - which category does the 'stat' (sorry Jim2) go ? Is it relevant to put in the speeding category if your judgement is impaired by alcohol ?

**MSTRS:Me** · 3rd January 2005, 09:01

".....use good judgment regardless of the standard limit, and to slow down on winding roads...." WTF

**Coyote** · 3rd January 2005, 09:01

Originally Posted by Posh Tourer :P

Yep, it sounds like the twisty areas will be the ones with lower speed limits......

How about better driver training? Or is that too hard to do?

Ah, but that would mean wasting money better spent on parliaments fairy cakes and such

**Deano** · 3rd January 2005, 09:03

Originally Posted by jimbo600

Now would this be an attempt to boost takings as people are driving slower these days and therefore HP are making less moolah.

Come on Jimbo - its all about safety - thats why white crosses on the side of the road are being banned, yet LTSA still allows Transit to collect revenue from large billboards advertising..........yes, you guessed it.... alcohol.

**jimbo600** · 3rd January 2005, 09:32

Originally Posted by Monsterbishi

Geez man, harden up already, even if they dropped a 50kph zone to 40kph, it would only add, on average, 90 seconds to your journey.

They're doing it to save lives, what better reason dya need?

Ah another gullible pawn. Add 90 secs to your journey? Wouldn't that depend on how far you were going?

When they lowered the 'killer highway' from 100 to 80 there was a fatal within a week. What does that tell you. If I were to run a business and there was an issue with it, I would not labour on one redundant solution. Such is the MO LTSA seem to be employing. Until the govt and LTSA see the folly in their ways by ignoring other solutions I believe they are vicariously liable.

You can bet your bottom dollar the speed reductions will be at the end of passing lanes or at the foot of hills, anywhere where the unwary can be pinged easily.

**jimbo600** · 3rd January 2005, 09:36

Originally Posted by Deano

Come on Jimbo - its all about safety - thats why white crosses on the side of the road are being banned, yet LTSA still allows Transit to collect revenue from large billboards advertising..........yes, you guessed it.... alcohol.

Silly me. Those white crosses are lethal mate. Thank fuck they,re being banned. They always grab my attention when I'm going 200+ kph

**Coyote** · 3rd January 2005, 09:36

I hope they will have a 10m stretch of 50kph road on a 100kph highway and a speed camera right next to that stretch of road. That would pull in the money, I mean, make the roads safer