Police ignore High Court judge.

[swbarnett]

Huh? You pay someone elses speeding tickets? You pay for someone elses failing to give way or stop at reds? Nice...

Not at all. What I'm getting at is that because some drivers are thought to be unsafe those that are safe but don't conform to the very narrow view of road safety set out in law pay the price.

[speedpro]

I *think* his point was there's no real safety issue,

Thanks for getting it Mr Preload.

It seems there is a determined few who cannot or will not see the reasoning. Probably the same few who because they travel at 100kmh maximum think they are perfectly safe and can therefore relax, and who also believe that anyone exceeding the 100kmh limit no matter the circumstances is either about to kill or about to be killed, like in the ads on TV.

[Patrick]

I *think* his point was there's no real safety issue, which as we all know is the claimed logic behind not exceeding 100km/h and ticketing those who do. A single red light runner off the road from demerits because they were caught repeatedly by a targeted campaign does much more for road safety than all the tickets issued for speeding in the <+20km/h bracket on roads such as described above, like the Huntly Expressway or virtually any section of the Auckland motorway system, barr maybe the harbour bridge.

I got it already...

Red light runners don't get demerits. (Yet...)

It seems there is a determined few who cannot or will not see the reasoning.

Same can be said from this side of the fence... It seems that there is a determined few who can not, or will not see reasoning....

The reasoning is simple. The MAXIMUM speed for EVERYONE is 100kmph.

Travel more than that, there is a tolerance. 111 or more, the snakey speed cameras and radar/laser operators get you and you get a ticket.

So, is it that 100kmph is the max for everyone?

Or does it only apply to a few?

If so, how can you tell which of those out there, where these 100k limits do not apply to, are?

Can they have a bright sticker on their visor or windscreen so the snakes know they are exempt?

Where do I apply for this exemption?

I speed. If I get a ticket, oh well....

If I don't, the cops don't get quota. No quota, no donut.

[Swoop]

1. We are so near to zero already that there is a case to say that we are already there.

2. The cost of any further reductions, if not already there, is getting close to being unsupportable. Both in terms of financial and social costs.

Don't forget that the population is growing, which makes a zero target even harder to achieve.

No quota, no donut.

Speaking of which... (sign at the AK airport...)

[Max Preload]

Red light runners don't get demerits. (Yet...)

Just further evidence it's nothing to do with road safety but revenue collection. In any case, surely you can trump up a careless driving charge. After all, it's more careless than what I got stopped for the other day, that is talking on my cellphone while turning left into my and giving way to the unmarked but nonetheless blatantly obvious cop car that was turning right into the same street. He tried to tell me I was being careless, yet I did nothing wrong and gave way to him, as was required. Most people turning left don't even give way. Now that's careless...

[swbarnett]

The reasoning is simple.

It may be simple. That doesn't make it right.

The MAXIMUM speed for EVERYONE is 100kmph.

Under law, yes. Again, this doesn't make it right.

, how can you tell which of those out there, where these 100k limits do not apply to, are?

How about waiting until an accident occurs and then punishing the causative driver, whatever the cause?

[speedpro]

Same can be said from this side of the fence... It seems that there is a determined few who can not, or will not see reasoning....

The reasoning is simple. The MAXIMUM speed for EVERYONE is 100kmph.

I KNOW the limit, whatever it is, applies to everyone apart from certain heavy users and those towing trailers or learners. The rest of your reply isn't worth quoting as it doesn't address anything that has been said in this thread.

Since you brought it up though, why couldn't drivers who pass certain advanced driving skills tests be allowed to travel at some increased speed on the roads. I would suggest that those skills tests should be the required tests for the basic licence but that's another discussion on it's own. We already identify drivers with lesser skills/experiance who are restricted to less than 100 kmh, so why not identify by a similar method those that are deemed capable of travelling at a greater speed?

[Toaster]

How about waiting until an accident occurs and then punishing the causative driver, whatever the cause?

"Accident"? ... every accident as you in your wisdom put it has a reason or number of factors that cause the event - that's why they are called crashes - not accidents. Someone or something (or both) are at fault.

Personally I'd rather the police and other authorities do their very best to prevent such "accidents" being caused by idiots on the road BEFORE THEY OCCUR, as both I and my beloved family would like to know we have the best chance of getting home safe and enjoying our lives thank you very much.

[Toaster]

... but yes it would be nice to have more appropriate speed limits for bikes....

[Max Preload]

Personally I'd rather the police and other authorities do their very best to prevent such "accidents" being caused by idiots on the road BEFORE THEY OCCUR, as both I and my beloved family would like to know we have the best chance of getting home safe and enjoying our lives thank you very much.

So would I. However, simply issuing tickets for exceeding the arbitrary posted speed limit does not do this. Some people are unsafe at any speed. What is really needed is better driver training and weeding out the incompetents. We always hear "it's a priviledge to have a license" so it's about time that was actually the case. Right now any fucktard can get one by performing a few simple tests. We need to raise the bar. A lot.

[scumdog]

It may be simple. That doesn't make it right.


Under law, yes. Again, this doesn't make it right.


How about waiting until an accident occurs and then punishing the causative driver, whatever the cause?

Read a magazine from 1973 last night, the editorial comment went along the lines of "55 miles an hour is ludicrous in this day and age and with the safety of modern cars, the speed limit should be 100kph, it's a nice round figure (How is THAT for logic?- 'my words') and is a more reasonable speed on the open road"

Sound familiar??

Substitute 100kph for 55mph and 120kph for 100kph and it's the same bleating we hear today.

BTW: 55mph is 88kph....for those too young to remember.

[Ixion]

Same can be said from this side of the fence... It seems that there is a determined few who can not, or will not see reasoning....

The reasoning is simple. The MAXIMUM speed for EVERYONE is 100kmph.

Travel more than that, there is a tolerance. 111 or more, the snakey speed cameras and radar/laser operators get you and you get a ticket.

...

I suggets that the great majority realise this. And also expect to get a ticket if they exceed that limit. What they DO object to is the constant nanny lecturing that moderate speeding is a monstrous crime endangering everybody. It is an offence. We all recognise that. So is overparking. If I park my cage too long , I will not be surprised if I get a ticket, nor will I moan (well, not TOO much. Bloody parking nazis). So, likewise if I twist my twistgrip too long I will not be too surprised if I get a ticket, nor will I moan (well, not TOO much. Bloody traffic cops.)

But I would object to a hectoring harnague from a parking waqrden. Likewise, I object to being vilified for travelling at 115kph.

Yes, excessive speed CAN be dangerous. That is why we actually have a specific offence of speed dangerous. Which is seldom (if ever) invoked for less than 150kph.

By implication , lesser naughtiness is no more dangerous, to myself or others than any of the other minor derelictions of daily life.

So cut the ranting and just give me the ticket .And I must say in fairness that the few tickets I have actually received have been delivered in a professional neutral manner. "You wuz doing 115kph. Thaz more than is allowed. Here's y' ticket". Fair enough. Interestingly, I have also been "forgiven" on rather more occasions, but often only after a lecture intimating that I am the greatest social evil since Mr Pol Pot. If I must choose I will take the lecture rather than the ticket, but do not expect me to believe a word of it, no matter how much I may grovel at the time (I have a very nice line in grovel and repentance, I done a course in it. It has stood me in good stead)

[Fatjim]

I bet if I let loose at ramdon around Riviera of the South with my AK47 the gendarmes would soon jump on me - regardless if I was actually endangering anybody...

Thats it, I was wondering what else cops enforce.

1. Speeding
2. Drink driving
3. Unlawful use or possesion of a firearm

Everything else just seems too hard.

[awayatc]

(I have a very nice line in grovel and repentance, I done a course in it. It has stood me in good stead)

Married......?

[MarkH]

What really annoys me is the anti-speeding ads. They show things like a car cornering too fast and losing control crashing off the road or cornering too fast and sliding out into the path of another car, killing some kid's mum.
The reason this annoys me is that there is a contrast with police action on the road were they park a van on the side of the motorway and ping drivers for exceeding 110kph on a long straight road with 3 lanes in each direction separated by a concrete barrier.

WTF has exceeding the posted speed limit got to do with poor judgement of speed to make it around a corner? Surely you can lose control on a corner and kill someone WITHOUT exceeding the speed limit, can't you?
I really think that the ads are used to pull the wool over the eyes of the non-thinking motorists to make them think the 'driving too fast tax' is actually a road safety measure. If it were really a road safety measure then you would see speed cameras in locations were people don't generally speed because it is too dangerous, but when people speed there it is a genuine safety risk. What you actually see is that speed cameras are placed where motorists feel they can safely drive in excess of the limit, thereby pinging large numbers of motorists. You also see cameras placed at the bottom of hills where someone travelling at a normal speed might pick up a few kph and exceed the limit + tolerance.

I could come up with a huge number of examples where the speed camera fixed locations are placed on roads that can safely be driven 20kph above the speed limit and have no schools or whatever near by.
There are also going to be plenty of times when someone is ticketed for travelling at 61kph in a 50kph zone, where the zone gets changed later to a 70kph zone - clearly showing that the 61kph was NOT a dangerous speed - unless of course the places that have their speed zone changed have never had a motorist ticketed for speeding on them. Then there are the roads that they won't change from 50kph because of hazards/traffic volume/pedestrian volume at peak times - but the cops will sit on these roads and easily meet their quota ticketing drivers that can comfortably travel at faster speeds at off-peak times. These roads could have a variable speed limit (50 at peak and as much as 80 offpeak) but that would be a pain to implement and enforce so they just go with the lower speed and let motorists get fines for travelling safely on an empty road.

I have also come across some cops that are complete jerks that will ticket someone for minor technicalities just because they can. Like the one that stopped my mate for going through a stop sign without completely stopping - my mate slowed to below 5kph, nothing was coming so he proceeded, technically against the regulations, but not like he just drove through at full speed. These cops will happily ticket you for a brief moment over the speed limit while passing a slow vehicle, even if it would be more dangerous to overtake slower and spend more time on the wrong side of the road. Of course there are other cops that are much more reasonable - they are not all jerks by any means.