So motorcycle deaths are overrepresented

[Blackbird]

Interesting concept, so how many MV accidents are NOT the result of human error, but the result of failure to accept responsibilty for a previous accident?

I think we're in danger of getting off track because of semantics. Failure to learn is probably a better way of putting it, irrespective of what spin you want to put on it.

[monkeymcbean]

Interesting concept, so how many MV accidents are NOT the result of human error, but the result of failure to accept responsibilty for a previous accident?

I can see where your comming from, in that someone has to be the cause if it is a two MV accident, but im saying if you can go along way to avoid the two MV accident if you are driving to conditions, ability, speed for ability, defensive driving, not expecting someone to look out for you, position yourself to be seen and a speed at which to be seen by other vehicle users.

Its alot, and a big ask, and like you said we all make mistakes me included, but i think by admitting in your mind i have to be responsible for myself goes along way to the way you ride.

Hey, but on this site, compared to alot of other riders that can ride at speed, I would be considered a bit of a 'nana' and im okay with that, as long as no one gives me a hard time!

[ManDownUnder]

I blame breathing. I heard that 100% of motorists had drawn breath in the 5 minute period prior to a fatal accident.

Conclusive proof it's not training or skill at all!

[ukusa]

My point is that the driving age has been 15 since Adam was a cowboy. What, really, has changed to make that age unsuitable now? A change that requires lifting that age, when so many other (age-restricted) things have had a reduction in age.

I don't really think it's an age thing. The road toll itself has I think halved over the last 30 years or so. Safety & new technology is a big factor in that, particularly for cars;

ABS, been around for a while now
ESC, cars only (it's called balance & skill on bikes)
Airbags (front, side, curtain, roof ... you name it, may as well drive in a bag)
side torsion beams
Roof structure
Bumpers
Crumple zones
Firewalls
Better suspension/handling/tyres
etc etc etc

You can get hit in a car, and most of the time you will survive without serious injury.

For bikes it's a bit more sparse ...
ABS - it's available on some at a cost
helmets are the same (although there are some worse than others)
Leathers are still leathers, available with or without armour.
Gloves
Boots

the road is just as hard when you fall on it. A crash on a bike is more dangerous/life threatening, and with an increasing number on the road it would only seam natural that bike riders make up an increasingly larger % of deaths on the roads.
Cars are safer, and when you compare them to cars of 30 years ago, they are like fortresses surrounded in bubble wrap.
Bikes on the other hand are still bikes, a little bit faster maybe, but still open & free from bubble wrap & cotton wool, just the way I like them.

[MarkH]

Now, that said, there are very few of us that having had a fright are not more aware of the circumstances that lead to that fright, and adjust to avoid a repeat.

I know what you mean, I ride like a complete nana in the wet due to some scary moments when I was a young rider (including 2 offs). In one case I could have been killed, but luckily wasn't - if I had been then I would have joined the category of riders that didn't get to learn from a mistake. Someone else could easily make less mistakes than me, but be unlucky and become a statistic.

[PrincessBandit]

Not to mention the fact that the "safer" vehicles are manufactured the more leeway it gives to idiots to rely on that safety. Cars might be able to withstand a whole lot more than they used to but for some that only means permission to push those boundaries even more. Unfortunately there is often another motorist in their vicinity when they do it. When they then lose control of their vehicle it's often someone else who was minding their own business who is on the receiving end.

[Katman]

What backlash?

Sorry, I thought that was what this thread was about.

[mynameis]

Or girlfriend's father...
My point is that the driving age has been 15 since Adam was a cowboy. What, really, has changed to make that age unsuitable now? A change that requires lifting that age, when so many other (age-restricted) things have had a reduction in age.

Yes and yes kind Sir, becoz of yuuf of 2day.

They seem to leave it late to take on some responsibility. I do like the Australian approach.

[MSTRS:Me]

I don't really think it's an age thing. The road toll itself has I think halved over the last 30 years or so. Safety & new technology is a big factor in that, particularly for cars;


Bikes on the other hand are still bikes, a little bit faster maybe, but still open & free from bubble wrap & cotton wool, just the way I like them.

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say...
Cars are now OK for 12 year olds to drive, but bikes are best left until one is really mature - like 65??

[MSTRS:Me]

Yes and yes kind Sir, becoz of yuuf of 2day.

They seem to leave it late to take on some responsibility. I do like the Australian approach.

Perhaps we'd be better going back to 30%+ deposits...
Attitudes have a lot to do with making (or not) responsible choices, but so does access.

[McJim]

All they need to do is make the tests meaningful. the current system of "buy 24 packets of chips and get a drivers licence" is what is to blame. Passing motor vehicle tests in New Zealand is just too easy.

[The Stranger:Me]

I think we're in danger of getting off track because of semantics. Failure to learn is probably a better way of putting it, irrespective of what spin you want to put on it.

Failure to learn - from a previous accident?
How many have the same accident twice? I'm sorry, I'm still not seeing where you guys are getting your numbers from.

[The Stranger:Me]

Sorry, I thought that was what this thread was about.

That's as bad as Patrick's argument that the law should be obeyed because it is the law.

Busy bodies shouldn't be obeyed because they are busy bodies. They should be told to take a hike.

I realise that busy bodies make laws.
Now see Patrick's argument.

[dpex]

"The results come a fortnight before the close of submissions on 61 ideas the Government is asking New Zealanders to rank for a new safety strategy in the face of failed targets to reduce road carnage."

Damn we are good. If they increase the arbitrary target from 300 to say 500 we hose in. No hand wringing required, no postulating, no conferences, no additional cost and no new laws.
Sounds much easier to me.

StrangerMe for Minister of Transport.

You hit it exactly.

[dpex]

All they need to do is make the tests meaningful. the current system of "buy 24 packets of chips and get a drivers licence" is what is to blame. Passing motor vehicle tests in New Zealand is just too easy.

I agree. Make the bastards do a hundred track-days, then force them to ride their road bikes cross country...over the Southern alps, I reckon, Then force the bastards to drive their bikes out of the back of a Hercules, at 10,000 ft , pop the parachute, then land the bike, in first gear, revs up to red-line, aiming at a brick wall, then make a movie out of it.....Let's call it Tripple X.