NZ road safety ads & videos (2014)

**oneofsix** · 27th January 2014, 20:49

Originally Posted by haydes55

Yea had a read of that, the police spokesman said to contact police directly if they have anything to say about the ad campaign.... Might lay a formal complaint if I can.

of course they want you to complain directly to the police, then they can bury your complaint. They aren't going to count them up and consider the individual points, but as long as The Herald has an interested public (indicated by people complaining) they are going to keep publicizing it and therefore rubbing the police's hierarchies noses in it

**Ocean1** · 27th January 2014, 21:11

Originally Posted by RDJ

We (the company I work for) have looked at this issue carefully as we need our medical staff to be able to respond to emergency and urgent calls in real-time ASAP, at times while they may, for example, be driving to work / from work. The research 'out there' (and there is a lot of it) does confirm that speaking on a cell phone is distracting, significantly so.

One easy-to-read / understand reference is at http://www.psych.utah.edu/AppliedCog...ab/cdir489.pdf

The 'money quote' is on p. 131

In sum, the data indicate that cell-phone conversations place demands upon the driver that differ qualitatively from those of other auditory/verbal/vocal tasks commonly performed while operating a motor vehicle. Even when cell-phone drivers direct their gaze at objects in the driving environment, they often fail to ‘‘see’’ them because attention has been diverted to the cell- phone conversation.

I recall some specialist official advice to govt on the pending legal changes banning cell phone use by drivers to the effect that hands-off units were statistically exactly as dangerous as a hand-held, which were themselves only just statistically visible against background noise.

Affected the planned policy change not a jot.

**ktm84mxc** · 28th January 2014, 08:05

So my view was correct the car that caused the accident was over taking the truck on the left and cut in front of it leading to the carnage the truck driver was not at fault and no one was using a cell phone. NZTSA said probably lets find some graffic crash video and use it to promote our views on road safety as they well know the more gore it has the more visual impact.

**BoristheBiter** · 28th January 2014, 08:35

Originally Posted by ktm84mxc

So my view was correct the car that caused the accident was over taking the truck on the left and cut in front of it leading to the carnage the truck driver was not at fault and no one was using a cell phone. NZTSA said probably lets find some graffic crash video and use it to promote our views on road safety as they well know the more gore it has the more visual impact.

And how do you come up with that?

**pritch** · 28th January 2014, 08:48

Originally Posted by BoristheBiter

And how do you come up with that?

He probably got it from the same TV and newspaper interviews that everybody except you seems to have seen. The driver of the car that got bowled said the woman driver undertook the truck so close that the truck couldn't take evasive action. Hit by the truck, her car then hit his car. The Police later rang him and told him that she had been charged.

Had the truck jacknifed under braking things could have been much worse.

I don't understand why you are having difficulty with any of this.

**Smifffy** · 28th January 2014, 09:13

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11192821

"There was no intention to mislead the public"

When I got my last speeding ticket I had no intention to exceed the limit either...

**BoristheBiter** · 28th January 2014, 09:36

Originally Posted by pritch

He probably got it from the same TV and newspaper interviews that everybody except you seems to have seen. The driver of the car that got bowled said the woman driver undertook the truck so close that the truck couldn't take evasive action. Hit by the truck, her car then hit his car. The Police later rang him and told him that she had been charged.

Had the truck jacknifed under braking things could have been much worse.

I don't understand why you are having difficulty with any of this.

Yep sorry, must have missed that post, read it now.
Yep the ad should be removed and an apology given to the truck driver.

I still think that emergency braking should be classed normal driving skills, regardless of vehicle.

Still nothing shocks me any more after 20+ years of driving 100+km a day in AKL and at the Greval road on ramp(southbound) it is the trucks that force their way in after coming down the transit lane.

**oldrider** · 28th January 2014, 12:55

Originally Posted by BoristheBiter

Yep sorry, must have missed that post, read it now.
Yep the ad should be removed and an apology given to the truck driver.

I still think that emergency braking should be classed normal driving skills, regardless of vehicle.

Still nothing shocks me any more after 20+ years of driving 100+km a day in AKL and at the Greval road on ramp(southbound) it is the trucks that force their way in after coming down the transit lane.

Sorted ... there was an appology to the truck driver in the Otago Daily Times this morning!