Death by Cheesecutter, again?

[swbarnett]

Aren't WRB's installed where motorcyclist would rather not ride?

True. The problem is that it takes a lot longer to get to work if I don't take the motorway.

Y'all probably would have a legitimate beef if they were all over your favorite twisty bits. If you're unfortuante enough to come into contact with one on a straight bit of road, it's possibly something more to do with your riding habit.

Definitely. On a day to day basis they don't worry me too much. It's the hypocrisy of them I don't like.

[swbarnett]

Motorcyclists CHOOSE to be motorcyclists...

It's still discrimination if it impinges on my freedom to choose.

[swbarnett]

Let me change the analogy slightly and ask what would happen if median barriers were harmful to those of a certain faith? After all, religion is also a choice.

[scumdog]

It's still discrimination if it impinges on my freedom to choose.

Yep.

Life's like that...there's always SOMEBODY waving the Discrimination Card(tm).

[Drew]

Are you a politician?
1) Irrelevant, when presenting data you supply the full set, anything less is politics.

2) They are removing them. And / or spending far more than the original savings the choice of WRB represented in the first place to cover them in plastic panels. And not just in Azerbekstan. In fact the main difference in installation is that here they’re installed on roads without the recommended minimum 3 meter offset distance from the lane. So yes, in that regard NZ is unique, we’re installing them incorrectly in the interest of cost. And not very much cost at that.

3) I’ve never said we shouldn’t have barriers. Simply that WRB isn’t as safe for riders as the similarly priced and performing concrete barriers. And not even NZTA are stupid enough to suggest that riders benefit from WRB, (including the posts that support them) on the roadside because they then don’t hit other posts further away.

That being the case why aren’t we using bike friendly barriers AND ripping out all of the spurious roadside posts, barriers and trees?

You could use the budget for WRB to pay for the concrete barriers and the savings from not killing "200+", (and in fact 260) bike riders to pay for removing dangerous roadside posts and trees.

And before another fuckwit suggests we all just ride better I'll point out that there's two aspects to risk: frequency and consequence. Given enough miles the best rider in the world will eventually make a mistake. And when he does the WRB won't give a fuck how good he was.

260 deaths won't be prevented, because the barrier itself is very infrequently a major contributing factor in the deaths.

Cunts woulda died most of the time they did anyway.

[swbarnett]

Yep.

Life's like that...there's always SOMEBODY waving the Discrimination Card(tm).

Agreed. Says more about those doing the discriminating than those doing the waving.

[scumdog]

Agreed. Says more about those doing the discriminating than those doing the waving.

Minorities calling the shots? Smacks of PC-ness,of the weak wanting to rule the strong, the tail wagging the dog.

Nature doesn't work that way.

[Akzle]

Minorities calling the shots? Smacks of PC-ness,of the weak wanting to rule the strong, the tail wagging the dog.

Nature doesn't work that way.

fucken ayye.

The weak join together in gangs, and roam the streets enforcing whatever their top dog/paymaster says.

[scumdog]

fucken ayye.

The weak join together in gangs, and roam the streets enforcing whatever their top dog/paymaster says.

True.

But then they're no longer the weak.

And have limited power.

[Akzle]

True.

But then they're no longer the weak.

And have limited power.

oh they're still weak. Try getting one to scrap you one on one without a belt full of weapons on.

Pussies, all.

[scumdog]

oh they're still weak. Try getting one to scrap you one on one without a belt full of weapons on.

Pussies, all.

Pfft, generalisation - and contradiction to your original claim.

Oh and pick the wrong one and it would be your last fight, not all as weak as you would like to think...

[Ocean1]

260 deaths won't be prevented, because the barrier itself is very infrequently a major contributing factor in the deaths.

Cunts woulda died most of the time they did anyway.

In the case of these particular 260 fatalities the barriers didn't contribute anything.

there were 97 fatalities from collisions with posts or poles, 70 from hitting traffic signs, and 93 from crashing into unprotected trees.

So, take away the posts, poles, traffic signs and trees from beside the road then what's going to kill 'em? Lack of a dayglow skivvy?

It ain't fucking rocket surgery, they've lost sight of what they're supposed to be doing, their "preventative" measures are killing people.

[Swoop]

Some days I feel like being a Mexican but it's yet to happen for some reason.

Yup. Van doors aren't made for entering whilst wearing a sombrero...

Minorities calling the shots? Smacks of PC-ness,of the weak wanting to rule the strong, the tail wagging the dog.

Aaaah! Green Party manifesto 101.

[swbarnett]

Minorities calling the shots? Smacks of PC-ness,of the weak wanting to rule the strong, the tail wagging the dog.

Nature doesn't work that way.

Modern human progress relies on those that go against the grain and defy tradition. Minorities are the backbone of social and technological advancement.

A balance must be struck. The tail can't wag the dog but at the same time the dog must respect the tail if it expects to function properly.

First and foremost you don't put in a "safety" measure that completely ignores a perfectly legal section of the community. As I've said before WRBs don't worry me that much when I'm riding. They're just another hazard. And there's the rub - a "safety" device that in practice is a hazard.

[Madness]

Let me change the analogy slightly and ask what would happen if median barriers were harmful to those of a certain faith? After all, religion is also a choice.

Then it would be a simple case of the more the better, obviously.