Safer Journeys for Motorcycling

[BMWST?]

Actualy you both have a valid point.
We do need a concerted 'effort' to apply pressure on the powers that be. BUT we also need to 'clean our act up'. As much as you may not wish to accept it. When a 'gang' is in the news, back patches etc? The instant public perception is they are 'US', motorcyclists. The sometimes stupid riding over roads like the rimutaka's.. does overtaking cars on bends and on yellow lines give a good public perception? ( I stand up and admit I do 'break the law' and exceed the speed limit at times) Although I jibe Hardly riders as do many others.. sadly many are my age group and they have loud pipes, dress in semi 'biker' gear.. often german style melmets, black face scarves covering to the eyes, etc, etc.. Not a 'good' public perception. As much as we have a right to wear what we like (for now) it does carry a public perception. I am not advocating that we all become captain sensible clones, just trying to outline some of the deep seated prejudices out there. They may read in the paper about boy racers etc,, but it is US, lane splitting and carving them up in traffic they see every day.
Polititians love this public perception, it allows them to use us as an easy target, rather than target a larger group, motorists. We do have a responsibility as a group to negate this image. Classic example was today on the ferry coming back to wellington. 4 bikes, 2 'old farts' and 2 young guys on an R1 and R6. The two on the R's were both on lovely clean bikes, covered in Dynotune etc stickers and with aftermarket exhausts. In itself, not a problem. Both wearing good 1 piece racing suits. (public image??) Anyway, during embarking, one had to keep? blipping the throttle. When we prepared to disembark, again he sat there revving the bike for ages. It became obvious it was annoying not only the 2 'old farts' but other motorists. His mate asked him to switch off, his response was to rev it even more. Good public image! Thats what we need to clean up. Yes I know boy racers in cars do exactly the same, but they are more socialy accepted than riders, sad but true. Most of their fathers would have been 'centre plot racers/cruisers'. I am sure many can remember a coulpe of years ago when the young teenager got banned for excessive speed? His fathers response was, "he's only just got it (car). He's young, of course he is going to want to see what it will do, why are you being so hard on him?"

^^^^^this ^^^^^ as i tried to say before

[yungatart]

I agree, why did I bother here. Obviously this is where burnt out activists come to die, and bemoan their lives while they do it. I think i'll go and find some people who care about their future enough to keep trying new methods, instead of constantly trotting out the old ones that clearly havent worked.

Like I said earlier, if the message isnt being heard, change the fucken message, and/or the way its delivered. Its not rocket science but clearly beyond the grasp of many here.

Enjoy your self pity.

By now.

Bye...don't let the door slam on your arse on the way out

[Conquiztador]

I think we do pretty well, that the road toll as a measure of our safety on the roads and an indication of the speed we should be travelling at long ago reached and blasted past the point of diminishing returns. I predict this won’t prevent them reducing speeds further, limiting overtaking more widely and introducing more control mechanisms and traffic calming devices over the next few years. The miniscule difference it’ll make will be buried amongst many far more influential factors, and if those factors are positive they’ll be claimed as a success for the above, if negative, they’ll be used to justify yet more draconian measures.

Just call me Nostradamus.

And that is really it. Somewhere someone with powers has decided that this is what is important; to get the road accidents/deaths down. And no matter how high the cost, no matter what it takes, it is worth pursuing.

In a much earlier post I stated that the number of suicides/year are higher than deaths on the roads but the funding to prevent them is miniscule in comparison. Yesterday I was discussing with someone re number of deaths in hospitals as a reult of wrong medication given, apperently those numbers are higher than road deaths too. Where are the campaigns that say "The number of suicides MUST come down" or "The number of deaths as a result of wrong medication given MUST come down?"

The reality is clear: The whole thing is not about saving lives, it is about politics, income and justification to push whatever self-serving goals that are the aim.

[MSTRS:Me]

I agree, why did I bother here. Obviously this is where burnt out activists come to die, and bemoan their lives while they do it. I think i'll go and find some people who care about their future enough to keep trying new methods, instead of constantly trotting out the old ones that clearly havent worked.

Like I said earlier, if the message isnt being heard, change the fucken message, and/or the way its delivered. Its not rocket science but clearly beyond the grasp of many here.

Enjoy your self pity.

By now.

What new methods? More and better training? That's as old as all the other things that have been and are being espoused.
There were 3 stand out wants to come out of the first Safer Journeys workshops...fix dangerous roads, slow down, more and better training.
Where's the something new you are so focussed on?

[Katman]

And that is really it. Somewhere someone with powers has decided that this is what is important; to get the road acidents/deaths down. And no matter how high the cost, no matter what it takes, it is worth pursuing.

In a much earlier post I stated that the number of suicides/year are higher than deaths on the roads but the funding to prevent them is miniscule in comparison. Yesterday I was discussing with someone re number of deaths in hospitals as a reult of wrong medication given, apperently those numbers are higher than road deaths too. Where are the campaigns that say "The number of suicides MUST come down" or "The number of deaths as a result of wrong medication given MUST come down?"

The reality is clear: The whole thing is not about saving lives, it is about politics, income and justification to push whatever self-serving goals that are the aim.

The cost to the country from suicide or medical misadventure doesn't even register in comparison to the cost of repairing and rehabilitating crash victims.

[riffer]

The cost to the country from suicide or medical misadventure doesn't even register in comparison to the cost of repairing and rehabilitating crash victims.

Nail > Head.

It's not the deaths, people. It's the one's who don't die. I shudder to think how much it costs to repair crash victims. Two people I know quickly come to mind: James Deuce and KatiePie. Although one can argue until the cows come home (or cross the road in front of a biker) who's at fault in either of their recent offs, the fact remains both of these riders would have cost ACC in excess of five figures easily to treat.

Multiply that by the amount of injury crashes in the last five years you can see the problem clearly.

[James Deuce]

Nail > Head.

It's not the deaths, people. It's the one's who don't die. I shudder to think how much it costs to repair crash victims. Two people I know quickly come to mind: James Deuce and KatiePie. Although one can argue until the cows come home (or cross the road in front of a biker) who's at fault in either of their recent offs, the fact remains both of these riders would have cost ACC in excess of five figures easily to treat.

Multiply that by the amount of injury crashes in the last five years you can see the problem clearly.

Oh FFS. I was back at work, part time in 3 months, full time in 4. There are people who fall down their steps at home who spend longer off work. A lot more people, a lot longer off work. If you want to "fix" ACC focus on DIYers and gardeners. They cost a shitload more than motorcyclists. You'd get the same spent on you Simon. You ignorant dickhead.

The issue here is the focus on an easily targeted, very visible minority.

We need to encourage people to ride bikes, not scare them off. Very, very soon Honda will have bikes on the market that equal and surpass the fuel economy of a decent '60s British single or twin, but with twice the performance, car-like maintenance schedules and durability. Congestion and resource consumption are buzzwords that politicians understand. A motorcycle that carries two people on the daily commute and uses 2.5-3L/100km will outperform public transport easily during its life and has the positive benefit of taking up not much more space than a bicycle to park.

The constant negative message " we're NOT the bad guys, tho government are", and " bikes are dangerous but I chose to accept that" are kicking the whole concept of motorcycling into the grave.

The basic philosophies of road use in NZ need to change. Training needs to be part of the long term solution. People giving a shit about other people needs to become the other major change. Road rage is just fucked in the head behaviour. Using a vehicle as a weapon is the same, even if its just to intimidate. Using poorly planned lane-splitting manoeuvres as an excuse to knock mirrors off is also fucked in the head.


Well, I really can't be bothered now. Same old bullshit finger pointing and backstabbing from BRONZ. Thanks a fucking lot.

[yungatart]

Nail > Head.

It's not the deaths, people. It's the one's who don't die. I shudder to think how much it costs to repair crash victims. Two people I know quickly come to mind: James Deuce and KatiePie. Although one can argue until the cows come home (or cross the road in front of a biker) who's at fault in either of their recent offs, the fact remains both of these riders would have cost ACC in excess of five figures easily to treat.

Multiply that by the amount of injury crashes in the last five years you can see the problem clearly.

I know a lady who was bowled over by her rather large exuberant dog in 2006, she is still receiving treatment for her injuries, has a permanent disability and is still on ACC unable to work. She has had many hospital stays and operations, had home help and had a taxi provided for her outpatients and physio visits for over a year. She lives rurally about 20 kms from town.
That would have to be in the med to high six figures to treat.

Interestingly I met her at physio when i was having treatment after my own off. The first thing she asked was "Are you getting rid of those dangerous bikes now then?" and was mortified when I suggested in response that she might put her dog down....

[StoneY]

No need to bash BRONZ, JD.
Simon was simply stating a true and statistical fact whether you like the taste of that bitter sweet pill or not, it is a FACT!

The kicker is it is not even the medical costs that are the biggest factor in the motorcycle recovery costs, its the income compensation, especially those 45-55 year old company directors who just watched 'Wild Hogz' and go buy a 50k Harley.
They happen to have the Class 6 as a left over from 35 years ago on the farm..... then they bin it in the first week off the showroom floor,and go on to claim 80% of 250k salary for 9 months, it's those pricks that spike the $$$ stats something chronic! All for the sake of a few days of training, and 200$ of fee's.

You may have been back at work in 4 months JD but that's pretty quick considering your injuries. Not as many people are as willing to return to work as soon either.
The factor that takes makes us such a huge focus is that we take longer off work. Nothing to do with the patch up costs.
KP was off way longer, (that girls an inspiration and a great friend of mine, do NOT read this comment any other way than a mere statement of truth!)

It SHOULDN'T matter in a no fault system, but that's what this government has justified its stance on.

The cost of the recovering motorcyclist that binned it on the open road is phenomenally higher than the average car crash victim (stated AVERAGE) and I have seen the raw data that proves this is true.
While car recovery costs are far higher than M'Cycle related costs overall, there are over 2.5 million of the fuckers so that's expected. Because our bikes are such a small %age of the national fleet, our costs are higher per capita. Again I have seen and analyzed the RAW data form all sources.

I still disagree with us being targeted and I disagree with the governments figures, the old '18x more likely' bullshit and the claim we are crashing more than ever (fleet has quadrupled in size in 20 years, fatalities are stable at about 45-50 for over ten years, ergo we are dying LESS)
But it is also the advances in medical and emergency vehicle technology that's assisted to reduce those numbers, there was only one rescue helicopter in NZ 20 years ago, now there is what; 50? 60? As well as all the regular Helicopter companies that provide contract cover for the full timers?

We may be having less fatalities per capita, but there are factors involved in keeping broken bodies alive that now cost us 300 times what such an injury in the 80's would cost.

Survival %ages are much higher, but so is the expense associated in keeping those people alive.

[Conquiztador]

And here I was, in my simplicity, thinking that it was about saving lives. How could I have been that naive to think that lives mattered.

The only thing that matters is money.

[MSTRS:Me]

And here I was, in my simplicity, thinking that it was about saving lives. How could I have been that naive to think that lives mattered.

The only thing that matters is money.

Well, saving lives is a huge priority...because of what a life is apparently worth.
Treating injuries is a direct cost (I believe the average m/c crash cost in that respect is $21,000 ish)
A death does have a direct cost of course, but is more in potential loss (apparently a human life is worth $3,000,000ish)

So, yes - it is about money.

[Katman]

Treating injuries is a direct cost (I believe the average m/c crash cost in that respect is $21,000 ish)

And if that figure is correct and the spreadsheet that Simon provided at post #261 is also correct then it would suggest that motorcyclists have managed to cost the country almost 44.2 million dollars over the last five years.

[NONONO]

And, just over this Xmas period...http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...t-acc-millions
Jeez.
BBQ's, swimming pools...Hey, aren't they usually in the back yard?...Better clean them up.

[StoneY]

Well, saving lives is a huge priority...because of what a life is apparently worth.
Treating injuries is a direct cost (I believe the average m/c crash cost in that respect is $21,000 ish)
A death does have a direct cost of course, but is more in potential loss (apparently a human life is worth $3,000,000ish)

So, yes - it is about money.

Yep - wish it were otherwise but....

I have actually been present when ACC officials have stated 'deaths cost us less than serious injury, especially where long term support, recovery, and income compensation over the long haul is involved'

The TOR's for MOTONZ is to reduce injury and fatalities, yet all I ever saw was a bunch of people with different opinions on how the money should be spent.

The only silver bullet we were shown is being largely left aside and ignored.

The biggest gain we can make the fastest is adopt the roading engineering practices developed in Vic, then look for the next thing to focus on - why re-invent a wheel that we already have access to without the need to repeat the research?

The best question I ever heard asked on a MOTONZ meeting was 'why does your tar seal not melt in the heat over there?'

[Katman]

And, just over this Xmas period...http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nation...t-acc-millions
Jeez.
BBQ's, swimming pools...Hey, aren't they usually in the back yard?...Better clean them up.

From a population of almost 4.5 million.