Originally Posted by Alan Wilkinson
You know what they say about assumptions Alan? How can that be an accurate answer when it involves guess work?(which is what an assumption is)
Forum whore
You know what they say about assumptions Alan? How can that be an accurate answer when it involves guess work?(which is what an assumption is)
Bucket Racer/Crasher
Many people on this thread are claiming that the first effect occurs, no mention had been made previously to the effects of going even slower. In the situation Alan mentions, stopped or reversing on the motorway, that is a proven way to kill yourself and it's all down to the speed differential. You are doing 0 or even -20kmh which makes you way slower than following traffic. I know there are all sorts of rules about being able to stop before hitting anything -the 2 second rule sort of thing, but you could be a safe reccommended distance behind another vehicle travelling at or below the legal limit but your view of the motorway could be obstructed for any reason. Suddnely the driver ahead darts to the left leaving you looking at a stationary or reversing vehicle with no time to avoid.
In fact a while ago there was a van load of people who had missed their off-ramp. They were reversing on the motorway and a collision occurred. I think the whole family in the van were killed. They were in the "fast" lane, reversing. Just as an illustration of how going REAL slow comparitively can get you killed.
Easily wound up!!
Post #301 on this thread...... still awaiting an answer.
Do those of you who feel "Fast And Safe" (AW, if you will) has nothing to contribute to the road safety debate, always adhere to all posted limits or do you accept that by breaking them you are being a menace to society? :spudwhat:
"There must be a one-to-one correspondence between left and right parentheses, with each left parenthesis to the left of its corresponding right parenthesis."
Forum whore
It's a "www.stuff.co.nz" poll question.
If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?
Forum whore
no... we leave the limit the way it is and people that get caught speeding stop trying to get out of tickets/bitching and moaning... I got a ticket, um, 3 weeks ago (?), bitched for a minute then accepted I was speeding... oh well, never mind... it's done, fine paid, end of story.... and I have actually slowed my average speed down...
that was easy... didn't even have to kill anyone...
Forum whore
I accept that I'm breaking the law and, if caught, will suffer the consequences...
simple... do the crime, do the blah blah blah
I need my licence to work... pretty friggin easy to work out why I'm not speeding anymore...
Bucket Racer/Crasher
I don't think even Alan has an argument with doing the crime etc etc. His argument is about what is classified as a crime and why.
Exceeding 100kmh is classified as a (heinous) crime because "speed kills". Alan and others disagree and are willing to argue and present contrary views and (verifiable & reviewed) research to support their views.
By the same token, it's good to see that members of this forum have also been doing some research and have presented information to support their arguments. I've checked out most of it and it has made me think.
Thing is I still like going (REALLY) fast. Personally I still view Alan's case as more compelling.
Forum whore
I'd rather see the government spend money on health care than people defending tickets in courts.....
and I like going fast too, but there are places for it.. and probably places you wont get caught
but if I do, I accept the consequences...
and I'd like to see cops doing people for doing 70-80 on sh1 coz they cause a hell of a lot of stupidity (tail-gating, stupid passing manouvres and reckless driving just for a start). If you can't drive around a corner without slowing by 30ks.. get off the fuckin road, you shouldn't be driving!
Salted Pork
Speeding isn't a crime, its an offence. If it was a crime it would covered under the Crimes Act 1961.
Saying that speeding tickets make criminals of otherwise innocent people is hog wash and is only usually argued by people who; (A) are stupid enough to collect heaps of tickets and subsequently lose their licence on demerit points, or; (B) have a political agenda to push and use this emotive BS to strengthen their otherwise weak arguements.
Salted Pork
So what? New Zealand isn't a private company. This makes no sense in the context of what is being discussed.
Salted Pork
Rubbish. All people have to do to avoid carnage on the roads is observe the road rules that we all studied when we first got our licences, maintain safe vehicles and stay on there own side of the friggin road. It really isn't that hard but for some people it seems to be exceedingly difficult.
Salted Pork
Maybe the insurance companies should take the American & Canadian approach and bump the premiums through the roof when their clients get speeding tickets?
If insurance was compulsary and drivers were heavily penalised for using a motor vehicle without insurance then they might think before putting themselves in a position where they may not be able to legally afford to use the roads.
After all the insurance companies as private enterprise need to turn a profit for their shareholders so why shouldn't they cover their arses by making those who have been found not observing acceptable driving standards pay more for cover? They do that in a way now with the no claims bonus that gets chucked out the window after a claim. The only difference would be that under the American example they are making a pre-emptive strike against the driver they assess as being more likely to crash.
I guess under Alan's example insurance companies aren't private enterprise??
Salted Pork
Paper, Scissor, Rock???
I can't give you a 100% answer sorry. As far as I'm aware different agencies have the say over different sections of road. Tranzit take care of state highways, local authorities take care of local residential roads etc. There are obviously rules & regulations governing what types of roads can have what maximum speed limits. Local residents have in some cases made submissions to local authorities and had the speed limit lowered on local roads that have proven to be problem areas.
Salted Pork
They do get the odd ticket but the awkward thing is that these people are usually some old granny or grandad, retired, payed taxes all their lives and is just having trouble keeping pace with the modern world. Try giving a ticket to your granny, its not a pretty picture. They would no doubt be on the Holmes show the next evening and Paul would just lap it up.
I guess they should get off the road and use public transport but as long as the a fit to hold a licence then they have the right to be on the road.
Easily wound up!!
The whinge is superficial, anyone will do this when they feel they have been hard done by. You admit you broke the speed limit (as do I) are you prepared to accept you are a danger to other road users. If thats the case, and you're a rational human being (as I believe you are) then obviously you will never knowingly break a speed limit again. Otherwise you must accept that not all limits are appropriate for all circumstances.
"There must be a one-to-one correspondence between left and right parentheses, with each left parenthesis to the left of its corresponding right parenthesis."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks