4kmh tolerance for Waitangi Weekend until 29 February?

[Zedder]

Didn't the Aussie NT show that people actually did self-regulate? And that after they imposed speed limits, accidents actually increased?

No, in 2007 they put open road speed limits in place due to fatalities in the NT being the highest in the OECD and twice the Australian average.

[Scuba_Steve]

Well you are ether retarded or can't read.
Read the post again fuck nuts and see if you can see the part where I said you can't. I said tell me there is no difference.

Can you read??? Your da 1 writing this shit & you don't even know what it says. Yet here you are spouting personal attacks to make up for your own inadequacies

So 1st your saying theres a difference between getting out of a 100km/h rear slide out & 150km/h one, the 100km/h one you have a chance of recovering (heres your own words below)

Try getting out of a rear slide at 100 and then try it at 150. then come back to me and say there is no difference.
If you make a mistake at 100 chances are you can recover before you crash into something or someone. Above that you have less time not only to react but less time to overcome what has gone wrong.

Now your saying you can't recover 100km/h rear slide out after I challenge you on it

Well you are ether retarded or can't read.
Read the post again fuck nuts and see if you can see the part where I said you can't. I said tell me there is no difference.

Think it's time not only for you to learn how to read, but also to understand what you are saying. Maybee you should get your mum to help you with your online posts from now on

[steve_t]

No, in 2007 they put open road speed limits in place due to fatalities in the NT being the highest in the OECD and twice the Australian average.

I found this from 2009

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2840.asp

"Up until 2007, rural roads in the Northern Territory, Australia had no speed limit. Claiming that speed limits were essential to saving lives, the state government imposed a 130km/h (80 MPH) limit on the Stuart, Arnhem, Victoria and Barkly highways and a 110km/h (68 MPH) speed limit on all other roads, unless otherwise marked lower. Despite the best of intentions, however, the number of road deaths actually increased 70 percent after the change -- despite worldwide drop in traffic levels"

[jaffaonajappa]

I found this from 2009

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2840.asp

"Up until 2007, rural roads in the Northern Territory, Australia had no speed limit. Claiming that speed limits were essential to saving lives, the state government imposed a 130km/h (80 MPH) limit on the Stuart, Arnhem, Victoria and Barkly highways and a 110km/h (68 MPH) speed limit on all other roads, unless otherwise marked lower. Despite the best of intentions, however, the number of road deaths actually increased 70 percent after the change -- despite worldwide drop in traffic levels"

Hmm, think NT is like 20 years behind most of Ausie....NT only recently Required truckies to report their non-animal road kills....

[Ocean1]

I found this from 2009

There's several similar results from various US state changes to open speed limits.

[Berries]

There is a tolerance for a good reason, which is because in the normal day to day act of driving, it is impossible to stick to exactly the speed limit for the entire duration of the journey. You could argue that in order to maintain your own tolerance, just in case you should get speed creep, you should drive slightly below the speed limit. Do this and enjoy the bad driving you'll witness from other drivers, frustrated by your cruising around at 45, 90 or what ever. Hopefully you won't cause an accident in the process.

Playing the Devils advocate here, you are not supposed to stick exactly to the speed limit anyway, it is the maximum legally allowed speed. If you do tend to stray +/-5km/h then you should be aiming at riding/driving at 95km/h to compensate.

4km/h tolerance to me means no tolerance. So I just ignore it and concentrate on the 40km/h tolerance that will cost me my licence instead. (I think some other smart arse said that earlier)

[Zedder]

I found this from 2009

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2840.asp

"Up until 2007, rural roads in the Northern Territory, Australia had no speed limit. Claiming that speed limits were essential to saving lives, the state government imposed a 130km/h (80 MPH) limit on the Stuart, Arnhem, Victoria and Barkly highways and a 110km/h (68 MPH) speed limit on all other roads, unless otherwise marked lower. Despite the best of intentions, however, the number of road deaths actually increased 70 percent after the change -- despite worldwide drop in traffic levels"

That's the complete opposite to my three research sources.

[jaffaonajappa]

and concentrate on the 40km/h tolerance that will cost me my licence instead.

Same.
But...need a better radar detector

[Jay GTI]

The speed limits ARE set. To exceed the limits and you are liable to recieve a Traffic Infringement notice. No tolerance is set in law. Descretionary powers are given to police to make their own judgement on the need to issue Infringement notices ... if a vehicle is stopped for breach of any transport regulation ... or any other matter.
It is up to the operator of the velicle to ensure they dont exceed the speed limits. No "what if's" are accepted in court.

In the past 9 km/hr has been the advised tolerance ... although most officers would not usually bother for under 15 km/hr over the open road limit. 50 and 70 km zones are a different matter. It is at their descretion to not do so though.

In short ... ANY speed over the posted speed limit is liable for an infringement notice.

And it make me laugh ... when supposedly "skilled" riders claiming difficulty in keeping to these speed limits.

Yeah you're not getting the point. I never said there was a tolerance set in law, just a generally accepted tolerance... which means, generally, the cops won't ping you if your speed is within the "accepted" tolerance. They are free to ping you for 101kph, but by and large chose not to. This is because we can't actually manage to keep to exactly 100kph at all times and because it is understood (generally) that if we maintain our own tolerance of 5-10kph below the speed limit to make sure we don't hit ping zone, other road users will get angry and frustrated and cause more trouble than it's worth. So we get a "get out of jail free" tolerance that does allow us to exceed the speed limit by an "accepted" margin, as long as we're not doing anything else stupid.

[Mully Clown]

Instead of the 4kph tolerance they should temporarily reduce the speed "limit" to 90kph and continue on with the 10kph tolerance.

[BoristheBiter]

Can you read??? Your da 1 writing this shit & you don't even know what it says. Yet here you are spouting personal attacks to make up for your own inadequacies

So 1st your saying theres a difference between getting out of a 100km/h rear slide out & 150km/h one, the 100km/h one you have a chance of recovering (heres your own words below)

Now your saying you can't recover 100km/h rear slide out after I challenge you on it

Think it's time not only for you to learn how to read, but also to understand what you are saying. Maybee you should get your mum to help you with your online posts from now on

Now you are either trolling or are really that stupid so either way it's pointless explaining as you don't have the mental ability to comprehend what has been written down.

[Scuba_Steve]

Now you are either trolling or are really that stupid so either way it's pointless explaining as you don't have the mental ability to comprehend what has been written down.

you can't explain little boy, you don't even understand it and the worst part is you wrote it.
Like I said from now on it would be best if you got your mum to help you with future online posts, she'll help you understand what you are writing & be able to explain other posts in a dumbed down form you can understand.
Your letting you inadequacies turn you into an angry little boy, you just need some help is all.

[Drew]

you can't explain little boy, you don't even understand it and the worst part is you wrote it.
Like I said from now on it would be best if you got your mum to help you with future online posts, she'll help you understand what you are writing & be able to explain other posts in a dumbed down form you can understand.
Your letting you inadequacies turn you into an angry little boy, you just need some help is all.

Pot, meet kettle.

You look to be a real fuckin winner from what you've posted, perhaps you should take some of your own advice.

Oh yeah, about the self regulated speed thing. With our licence system, and our roads, it'd be fuckin carnage on a biblical scale. You small minded cocks who can't seem to see past your own noses really need to aquire some scope before opening your gobs.

[MSTRS:Me]

That's the complete opposite to my three research sources.

All I've ever seen is that AFTER limits were set, deaths went up.
If deaths in NT were higher than 'average' to start with, then something else is going on and introducing limits is not the answer (we know that anyway - not that we actually know what the answer is)

[Scuba_Steve]

Pot, meet kettle.

You look to be a real fuckin winner from what you've posted, perhaps you should take some of your own advice.

Oh yeah, about the self regulated speed thing. With our licence system, and our roads, it'd be fuckin carnage on a biblical scale. You small minded cocks who can't seem to see past your own noses really need to aquire some scope before opening your gobs.

well my response to that came from your very own hand

Pot, meet kettle.
You look to be a real fuckin winner from what you've posted, perhaps you should take some of your own advice.
You small minded cocks who can't seem to see past your own noses really need to aquire some scope before opening your gobs.