Speeding tickets. Why the angst?

[sinfull]

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha a troll surely

[FJRider]

So, if the law told you you could only eat white bread because some people were stupid enough to choke on wholemeal (but were safe with white) would you blindly comply?

Having false teeth means ... I only eat WHITE bread anyway ... no issues there ...

Just because I "have no problems keeping within any posted (speed) limit" if I choose to does not mean anyone has the right to force me to do so.

Ummm force NO ... but as it's required by law ... non complience to that law may result in legal action taken out against you, by those empowered to do so.

Why is YOUR choice(s) more important than mine. OR anybody elses ... ???

The African Americans of the 50s should've had no problems keeping to there section of the bus. Are you saying they were wrong for deliberately sitting outside their assigned area?

The fact is, that that bus law only "applied" to one group of people (the whites could sit anywhere they liked)... perhaps ... if we changed the law to accomodate the "choices" of bikers only ... to allow them to travel at ANY speed they like ... in whatever VEHICLE they like .. ???

The speed limit is just another example of legalised discrimination. It discriminates against those drivers that have no problem keeping within a reasonable speed for the conditions that sometimes just happens to be above some arbitrary number of a sign post.

Enforcement of the traffic laws, allows for discretion by the officer, should the officer believe it should be given. You dont need to be stopped by an officer, to be given this discretion ...

And if "discrimination" is your true belief ... see a lawyer ... he could do with a laugh ....

[Jantar]

So just how would you resolve the "problem" that your riding/driving skills are so much better than others, and your ability to pick the road/weather/traffic conditions everywhere is faultless, that you should be allowed to ride/drive at whatever speed you choose without being pulled over for it?....

Huh? I have tried reading swbarnett's post again and nowhere can I find that he claims his "riding/driving skills are so much better than others" Nor can I find where he claims his "ability to pick the road/weather/traffic conditions everywhere is faultless".

Sorry, strawman arguments do not assist your case. How about instead, you try answering his question: "The African Americans of the 50s should've had no problems keeping to there section of the bus. Are you saying they were wrong for deliberately sitting outside their assigned area?" Well, NO, you don't have to because that is another strawman question and has nothing to do with the issuing of speeding tickets in New Zealand.

The issues are:
Why do we have speed limits?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all sections of road to which they apply?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all types of vehicle to which they apply?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all drivers/riders to which they apply?
Are those speed limits enforced evenly and fairly?


Only when those issues are addressed will we get a general acceptance of speed enforcement.

[Edbear]

Huh? I have tried reading swbarnett's post again and nowhere can I find that he claims his "riding/driving skills are so much better than others" Nor can I find where he claims his "ability to pick the road/weather/traffic conditions everywhere is faultless".

Sorry, strawman arguments do not assist your case. ...SNIP...Only when those issues are addressed will we get a general acceptance of speed enforcement.

Not at all, he does obviously feel he should be allowed to ride/drive at whatever speed he chooses without being ticketed for it. Thereby, claiming by default that he has the skill to judge for himself what is safe and appropriate for the circumstances. Who on here would say they don't have this skill?

My challenge was for him to demonstrate how to legislate for individual preferences especially where those preferences are solely based upon the individual's opinion of his own riding/driving skills.

[oneofsix]

The issues are:
Why do we have speed limits?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all sections of road to which they apply?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all types of vehicle to which they apply?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all drivers/riders to which they apply?
Are those speed limits enforced evenly and fairly?


Only when those issues are addressed will we get a general acceptance of speed enforcement.

why? they a reported to be set at a safe speed for the technology of road and vehicles. They are sometimes set to "save fuel". Drivers are meant to judge their own safe speed within the maximum. How I wish this were true. In truth they are set for political expediency.
appropriate for all sections of road? No. Not when you get 80k limits on 100k roads AFTER the safety improvements. Nor when you get 60k limits on 80k roads after some idiot comes off at over 100k on a sharp bend or other slide off a 40k bend at 30 due to oil.
appropriate for all types of vehicle? no. B-trains, trailers limited to 90, cars to 100 therefore bikes should be 110k
appropriate for all drivers/riders? see why. Can't set the limit for the driver. Most over estimate their ability (unlike me who is amongst the top 10% of drivers just like 80% of the population believe of themselves). The 70k learner thing was stupid and I would not like to see this again. If you can't travel within 10% of limit you are holding up traffic and should adjust your driving to allow the traffic to flow (pull over or get off the road).
enforced evenly and fairly? yes for the most part although fairly get emotional. Truckies would say they get picked on, cars would say they do and bikers say they do. Trailer seem to slip through the gap between their limit and cars. Actually I guess all those that are meant to travel at less than 100k slide under the camera, which would make it unfair and a scam.

[Scuba_Steve]

The issues are:
Why do we have speed limits?

"The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions" would be the simple answer to why they were 1st introduced

Are those speed limits appropriate for all sections of road to which they apply?

Nope

Are those speed limits appropriate for all types of vehicle to which they apply?

Nope

Are those speed limits appropriate for all drivers/riders to which they apply?

Nope

Are those speed limits enforced evenly and fairly?

Not even in the slightest

[FJRider]

The issues are:
Why do we have speed limits?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all sections of road to which they apply?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all types of vehicle to which they apply?
Are those speed limits appropriate for all drivers/riders to which they apply?
Are those speed limits enforced evenly and fairly?


Only when those issues are addressed will we get a general acceptance of speed enforcement.

I dont believe they are "issues", merely questions ...

If appropiate limits were place on the appropiate roads ... the limits would be dropped ... in some places ... considerably ... and the "advisory" corner speed signs may be changed to lawful LIMIT. Good bike roads reduced to scooter country.
Speed limits on vehicles should depend on the vehicles ability to do it, given if the driver/riders ability to do this can be proved.
Thus ... in MY belief ... Better DRIVER testing/training should be introduced BEFORE speed limits are raised. (note the learner speed limit for bikes, was raised)

As for enforcement ... the few muppets (enforcers and public) ruin the arguement for increased limits, by their actions, and by the statistics of their actions.

Untill the standard of the lowest common denominator is raised ... nothing much will change.

[chasio]

appropriate for all types of vehicle? no. B-trains, trailers limited to 90, cars to 100 therefore bikes should be 110k

I don't follow you there.

Virtually any car made in the last 20 years can outbrake any bike; we are more likely to crash due to factors such as surface issues (leaving aside ego and skill issues) AND we get more severely injured if we do have an accident. Why should the speed limit be higher for bikes than cars? I'm not saying that I am against it, just that I can't see that a logical case can be made for it.

Perhaps I am missing something.

[Scuba_Steve]

I don't follow you there.

Virtually any car made in the last 20 years can outbrake any bike; we are more likely to crash due to factors such as surface issues (leaving aside ego and skill issues) AND we get more severely injured if we do have an accident. Why should the speed limit be higher for bikes than cars? I'm not saying that I am against it, just that I can't see that a logical case can be made for it.

Perhaps I am missing something.

same as car being allowed faster than the truck I'd assume. The truck has 18 wheels to lockup, has even less chance of injury & can *outbrake a car, so why is the car allowed faster?


*load & truck dependant

[superman]

same as car being allowed faster than the truck I'd assume. The truck has 18 wheels to lockup, has even less chance of injury & can *outbrake a car, so why is the car allowed faster?


*load & truck dependant

Reckon it's load on the road maybe? Trucks at 10km/h faster than there current maximum wear down the road past the point of efficiency? Perhaps... or perhaps idiot law makers exist. Which is more likely?

[oneofsix]

Reckon it's load on the road maybe? Trucks at 10km/h faster than there current maximum wear down the road past the point of efficiency? Perhaps... or perhaps idiot law makers exist. Which is more likely?

Load on the road makes sense therefore the lighter the bike the faster its allowed to go

No I think it is to do with the trailer and jack knife risk.

chasio braking ability relates to following distance and visible clear road. Light weight, manoeuvrability should allow quicker speeds Also gets us out of the way of cagers trying to crush us.

[Brian d marge]

I dont believe they are "issues", merely questions ...

If appropiate limits were place on the appropiate roads ... the limits would be dropped ... in some places ... considerably ... and the "advisory" corner speed signs may be changed to lawful LIMIT. Good bike roads reduced to scooter country.
Speed limits on vehicles should depend on the vehicles ability to do it, given if the driver/riders ability to do this can be proved.
Thus ... in MY belief ... Better DRIVER testing/training should be introduced BEFORE speed limits are raised. (note the learner speed limit for bikes, was raised)

As for enforcement ... the few muppets (enforcers and public) ruin the argument for increased limits, by their actions, and by the statistics of their actions.

Untilthe standard of the lowest common denominator is raised ... nothing much will change.

agreed , and that lowest common denominator will get worse

not long now before " where is the ABS on my Harley comes to this town"

Stephen

[oneofsix]

I dont believe they are "issues", merely questions ...

If appropiate limits were place on the appropiate roads ... the limits would be dropped ... in some places ... considerably ... and the "advisory" corner speed signs may be changed to lawful LIMIT. Good bike roads reduced to scooter country.
Speed limits on vehicles should depend on the vehicles ability to do it, given if the driver/riders ability to do this can be proved.
Thus ... in MY belief ... Better DRIVER testing/training should be introduced BEFORE speed limits are raised. (note the learner speed limit for bikes, was raised)

As for enforcement ... the few muppets (enforcers and public) ruin the arguement for increased limits, by their actions, and by the statistics of their actions.

Untill the standard of the lowest common denominator is raised ... nothing much will change.

in the bit highlighted I think you make a fundamental mistake, the same one most of us do. I assume the muppets don't know what they should be doing or how to do it right. This is wrong. It is a bit like the SMIDY. They know, they are just too lazy or stupid. They do it right for the training and the test but then get lazy on it. No matter how good the training or the test they will still just play the game until the pass and then do WTF they can get away with on the roads.
This is part of the angst about speeding tickets in a back to front way. With the focus on speed where it is doing no harm instead of the harder to police getting the basics right. When you see patrol cars turn into the far lane on multi-lane roads and splitting lanes to avoid the merge it is no wonder joe blogs doesn't care about the basics. And yet when you challenge Joe for left lane when he is turning right into the multi-lane (not to be done on a bike) it is funny how quickly he remembers the rules

[FJRider]

... it is funny how quickly he remembers the rules

For the sake of convenience ... the actual rules are often broken ..... by all parties ... sometimes we even get away with it... sometimes not.

No amount of training, or rules are worth anything ... if either is NOT applied ... or obeyed.

[BoristheBiter]

same as car being allowed faster than the truck I'd assume. The truck has 18 wheels to lockup, has even less chance of injury & can *outbrake a car, so why is the car allowed faster?


*load & truck dependant

Because cars can turn safer at higher speeds than trucks.