I'm a grave menace to society

[Mekk]

And so many people don't stop for red lights either. Why does speed get the priority?

I don't know, perhaps because there are more speed related crashes. I wish there was more policing of red light runners but I'd say they are allocating resources to the more important.

Research that has been shown as flawed. It seems clear to me that speed is not the number one cause of accidents or a major drain on the health system.

The whole system is flawed, but it's better than any other solution I have seen posted here. I say better in terms of practicality and fairness for all.


Sorry, I'm not replying to the quotes in between. I can just see it taking the thread elsewhere and is mostly irrelevant.

At the same time they don't want to stop the gravy train for when they get in to power.


They all like their gravy train.

This idea seems a bit far-fetched for me. Anyone who is in power has a lot of gravy and I'm sure the others would fight for that to the point of spilling it. It also doesn't explain how they've managed to keep everyone quiet. In this day and age the colour of Hilton's underwear makes the news, that certainly would have by now.

Tolerance isn't a big issue to me. If you're going to have a law it should be enforced. You've just got to make damn sure that the law is fair and equitable and actually addresses the issue that it is designed for.

Well the law is being enforced, as per this thread existing. In terms of fairness, one limit for all seems to be the most fair in my eyes. I mean sure, it could be better but there'd be a helluva lot more to consider.

With regards to it addressing the issue, that's its goal. It's not flawless but it is definitely addressing it.

---

If that were really true they'd not be solely hammering 'speeding' which has been shown time and time again to not be a major factor in the majority of crashes.

Well they're not solely targeting speeding are they? I mean there are still checkpoints for alcohol and other related offences.

It may not be a majority of crashes, but I was looking through some stats here. If you look at page 49 you will see that the number one fatality percentage comes from "probably driving too fast for the conditions". It doesn't show whether they were under the limit or not but it shows that speed is a factor. Keep in mind these stats are from 2005, but I checked 2004 and 2003 and there's a definite trend.

Another interesting thing to note is that the majority of crashes occur when the weather is fine, suggesting the conditions changing are more of the driver than the weather. Again I don't know which of these were too fast for the conditions, which were alcohol etc, but I found it interesting anyway. :P

But the fact speed is targeted without consideration to other mitigating factors (location, traffic volume, road conditions etc) makes it pure revenue collection. There is no arguing that.

I think they are though. I know that weather conditions are taken into account, I haven't seen other variables but didn't really look for them either. But sure, if you have information to put me right, by all means share.

But it isn't.

This was a bit tongue-in-cheek anyway, but there aren't really any stats saying that they're not. I mean they may not be, but I was just going from reading other posts. I think this one's open only to perception.

it's not going to make the slightest bit of difference to me as a motorcylist if they t-bone me at 50km/h or 61km/h.

This first part of what you said was subjective, so I'm just addressing this part because I disagree. I think it would make a difference. I mean that 11km/h could be the difference between you hitting something and not, or the difference between your neck breaking and not. If there's more force there's definitely going to be a difference. Of course you won't notice a difference if you're a coma...or if you're dead...but that could be the difference right there.

He's still a politician. The brainwashed public would think he was reckless if he increased the speed limit. And if he toughened licensing they'd feel victimised - it's their right to drive poorly as long as they stay within the speed limit, you know - they think that's all that matters.

I dunno, I don't think we'd think he was reckless if he provided proof that they were doing it just for money. If he had facts that said that we were safer without a limit, then we would accept them.

Meanwhile, you're stopped at the side of the road writing out a ticket for some poor schmuck caught at 111km/h on the motorway at 2am Monday morning instead of biding your time and waiting for the worst offenders, who simply don't drive to the conditions.

Yep, that's definitely a flaw in the system but I've said already how it isn't perfect. Thing is though, that person stopped for doing 111km/h could have been driving to the conditions at 100km/h as well, so whose fault is it?

You could be cheeky and ticket him for wasting officers' time by driving over the limit when he could be stopping real offenders.


Sorry that this reply is such a novel, taking on 3 at once isn't easy.

*edit: Oh yeah and this is interesting as well: http://www.police.govt.nz/service/ro...ngthefacts.pdf

[Mekk]

Um. Yes it's related, but there are other factors involved. Like, how far away you are when you notice the hazard and start braking. Hence why I'm always more nervous of tailgaters than speeders with a clear road ahead.

(Note the difference between an explanation and a simple 'bollocks')

Richard

There definitely are other factors involved but I mean if you're speeding, there's going to be less time to notice that hazard and start braking anyway. Sure you'd have to be going a fair click for it to make a big enough difference, but they would have had to have a cut off point somewhere to account for different peoples' reaction times.

I'd be more nervous of idiot tailgaters too. It's just because of their proximity for me, which in itself is a hazard.

[Mekk]

Quite correct! That's why I try very hard to avoid said crashing!

Now can anyone say by what factor the likelihood of crashing increases as speed increases...?

You could probably work it out if you took the subject's reaction time, the speeds they're travelling, the weather they're travelling in and the road conditions and threw them all together into one big blender of equations and made one disgusting smoothie.

Problem is, it'd be an individual equation for everyone and would depend on their state of mind, the amount of sleep they had last night, their diminishing age, LOADS of things. Things that would change all the time. You could have the likelihood of crashing at one speed for one weather condition for one day...for one person.

Now imagine that officer trying to drink that smoothie, the smoothie's contents changing, the chef's opinion of the smoothie changing and you can see that they're better off eating a donut.

[Albino]

In essence the logic is that by enforcement we can reduce one of the factors to a low "safer" level reasonably easy.

A question I have is, have any studies been done on the psychological effects of being restricted to a performance level of the lowest common demoninator?

My guess is that the following would result:

• Less attention to own actions
• Some feeling of resentment especially when penalised
• Disrespect for authority especially those enforcing
• Anger towards poor drivers who are viewed to be the cause of the restrictions

When performing a dangerous activity you need a certain level of stimulation to keep focused. Roughly half the drivers on our road would be of an above average skill and they are being forced to drive at a limit designed for the lower quartile. Do they switch off?

Just something to consider.......

[MSTRS:Me]

In essence the logic is that by enforcement we can reduce one of the factors to a low "safer" level reasonably easy.

A question I have is, have any studies been done on the psychological effects of being restricted to a performance level of the lowest common demoninator?

My guess is that the following would result:

• Less attention to own actions
• Some feeling of resentment especially when penalised
• Disrespect for authority especially those enforcing
• Anger towards poor drivers who are viewed to be the cause of the restrictions

When performing a dangerous activity you need a certain level of stimulation to keep focused. Roughly half the drivers on our road would be of an above average skill and they are being forced to drive at a limit designed for the lower quartile. Do they switch off?

Just something to consider.......

You are correct. On all points.
Just to be a prick tho...100kph is the limit, it is now the norm, and as such has become boring. When we exceed this, we generally pay much more attention at the higher speed if only to keep an eye peeled for a pinging. If 120/130, say, was brought in as the limit, that would become the norm and therefore become boring.....

[ManDownUnder]

A question I have is, have any studies been done on the psychological effects of being restricted to a performance level of the lowest common demoninator?

I don't know of studies per se, but I know of a wonderful phenominon called Social Facilitation. Basically it says that if you're doing something (anything really) with people better than you, there is a natural tendency to lift your game.

Go bowling with a national champ and I bet you have a better game than you normally do. Run with those fitter than you and you will do better etc etc etc (You'll still be tired, but overall you'll do better than you would have solo)

I expect the opposite is also true - I know I used to suffer from "dumbing down"... hainging around people incapable of holding higher level conversations, and it was interesting to observe how my own world stopped expanding and I got held back with them.

Peter Gabriel's song Big Time mentions it to (it actually inspired me to think big like I naturally do, rather than limit myself for the sake of others).

[swbarnett]

Crap!______

Which part? If there are now better methods to estimate the vehicle's speed prior to braking tell us about them. Or do you honestly think tyre wear etc. is not a factor?

[spudchucka]

Which part?

Pretty much all of it.

[swbarnett]

You could probably work it out if you took the subject's reaction time, the speeds they're travelling, the weather they're travelling in and the road conditions and threw them all together into one big blender of equations and made one disgusting smoothie.

Whatever happened to "Innocent until PROVEN guilty". Nobody has the right to call me an accident causer without proof. This smoothie is what the courts are for. If the police can't prove in a court of law that I'm a hazard to other road user (not OTHER road users, not myself) then they should leave me alone.

[swbarnett]

Pretty much all of it.

So you're saying that the ONLY factor in the level of trauma is speed prior to braking? I think you need to go back to school and do some physics.

Perhaps you could fill us in on how speed prior to braking is estimated from an accident scene.

[Ocean1]

if you're doing something (anything really) with people better than you, there is a natural tendency to lift your game.

So, the reason for your presence here is.... ?

[ManDownUnder]

So, the reason for your presence here is.... ?

I love social intercourse

[spudchucka]

So you're saying that the ONLY factor in the level of trauma is speed prior to braking?

No. I'm saying post number 269 is crap.

[scumdog]

Whatever happened to "Innocent until PROVEN guilty". Nobody has the right to call me an accident causer without proof. This smoothie is what the courts are for. If the police can't prove in a court of law that I'm a hazard to other road user (not OTHER road users, not myself) then they should leave me alone.

Does your above ideas also include those driving with over the breath alcohol limit that haven't crashed into others?
And those that cut blind corners and haven't crashed into others?
And run red lights and haven't crashed into others?
And......................?

I'm sure in your mind they too are 'innocent'

[Ocean1]

I love social intercourse

I see, and you find consorting with your betters improves your performance in this regard? I ask merely for information, I’ve had no luck at all in my attempts to consort with various chicks of extreme hotness.