No ticket quota for police? Read this...

[pete376403]

When I started driving the NZ open road limit was 55 (MPH) When the first fuel crisis (67?) occurred, the open road limit was dropped to 50 (MPH) plus we got carless days.
Once that was over it went back up to 55 - when metrics came in 55 didn't equate to any nice round figure so it went up to 60 MPH / 100 KMH.

Now local bodies can set limits and the speed is all over the place - anywhere from 30 (eg central wellington) up to 100, but never with any consistency eg one of wellingtons 6 lane, median-barrier divided highways goes from 100 to 70 and back to 100 within 1.5 kilometers (Ngauranga gorge)

[nico]

i beleve theres a quota

[<Rhino>]

I dont think its a quota I think its a target, by achieving that target they achieve results: safer roads for other (non-offending) road users.

Its our tax and levey dollar that pays for the police so why bother worrying about somthing that you wont get done for unless you break the law. Simple really.

I have alot of resepct for the police, they do a job most of us wouldnt do, for less money than most people wouldnt get out of bed for in testing enviroments. If I speed, run a light or do somthing stupid then tuff luck, my actions, my responsability. Thats what pisses me off about people with lesser morals that always have someone ELSE to blame... Go for it....give them all the tickets they deserve and listen to em bleeeeeeeet, baaahhhhhhh....

[scumdog]

And you have it from where that this is not happening???

And you have it from where that it IS happening??

[scumdog]

I don't have a problem with tickets when they are deserved. But to do a "shit, almost end of month and I need heaps of them written, better get busy" attitude has nothing to do with making the roads safer.

I'm still waiting for the first time I hear a cop being sacked for not reaching his 'quota'.

I know I don't worry about it.

[McJim]

Here's a question - if thee WAS a quota (not asying there is and not saying there isn't) why would everyone have a problem with that?

Just be careful, don't get caught and you'll be fine. It has worked for me so far....

[Patar]

Here's a question - if thee WAS a quota (not asying there is and not saying there isn't) why would everyone have a problem with that?

Just be careful, don't get caught and you'll be fine. It has worked for me so far....

I don't what the big fuss is about a quota either...

If you don't want a ticket, don't speed.
Quota or not, if you're not speeding you won't get a ticket.


If police are given a quota and they meet said quota, then obviously there's more than that many people speeding.
If people know they're going to get caught speeding, they will slow down = safer roads.

[Toaster]

The big problem here in my personal opinion is not the speeding but the state of the roads, They are not even 2nd class roads compared to most European, US and Aussie roads.

Agreed. But I'd add driver skill (or lack of) being a swaying issue for the lawmakers.

On the whole I feel that riders are better drivers becasue they are more aware as they ride and drive... but that is a mere opinion.

The roads however are pretty average BUT compared to many countries we have done well to have so many sealed roads given our very small population base from which to fund it.

NZ is not and is unlikely to ever be a 1st world country without the resources to fund expansive policies the likes used in a small nation like Dubai. People need to get to grips with that reality. Lets hope that big oil exploration going on out to sea turns up trumps and brings billions in royalties to the crown. it would be a great way to lower taxes and better infrastructure funding - all fuelling growth.... but I'd say we'd have more chance of winning lotto powerball (38 million to 1).

[MSTRS:Me]

I don't what the big fuss is about a quota either...

If you don't want a ticket, don't speed.
Quota or not, if you're not speeding you won't get a ticket.


If police are given a quota and they meet said quota, then obviously there's more than that many people speeding.
If people know they're going to get caught speeding, they will slow down = safer roads.

You really believe that?
And 'getting a ticket' is not just about speeding. Which is a whole other argument....
The problem with quotas (or any other title you choose to put on the policy) is that consistant failure to achieve will simply result in a lowering of the goal post. The tired old argument of 'making the roads safer' doesn't wash. Making roads safer should be about the roads themselves, not the users. We know it is about money (doesn't matter where it goes) and when the money stream is drying up, the PTB will simply drop speed limits (since speed is the most easily detectable and enforceable of behaviours).

[pete376403]

I'm still waiting for the first time I hear a cop being sacked for not reaching his 'quota'.

You never will. But IF the police job is like most others where salary is directly related to performance, an officer who consistently fails to meet this non-existant quota is going to be getting minimum salary increases, passed over for promotions, etc., and eventually leave the job. Sort of constructive dismissal.

[The Stranger:Me]

In your opinion it may be an ass, but that is just it - your opinion. Bitter for getting a few tickets huh? Your fault if you did, not the cops.

Not bitter at all toaster, please tell what it is I should be bitter about?
Do you know about some of my tickets that I don't?
Despite your reliance on it, clutching at straws is not really a good argument.

MP's hardly set a moral standard for us to follow. Poor example.

Would you jump off a cliff just because someone else did it? Just because there are hypocrites liars and cheats out there - it does not mean to say we need to be, just because they are.

No, it is an appropriate example.
They do and should set the moral compass, like it or not.
As any leader should know, the most appropriate way to lead is by example. They are leaders and they set an example, whether or not you agree with it.

And no mummy, I wouldn't jump, I would however laugh at you for blindly jumping because someone passed a law telling you to.

Without rules and laws, what do you really think we'd be like if anyone could do whatever they liked? Imagine the road toll for a start.... how many people you know and care for would be hurt or killed if it was up to anyone to ride or drive however they wished?

The general principal of following a law simply because it is the law is overly simplistic and extreemly dangerous. I am not referring to traffic laws, but all laws. One should consider the law and its effects and implications and be prepared to disobey.

It is largely a given that power corrupts, as it does we tend to see more corrupt laws passed - for example laws limiting our right to free speach in an election year.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

[Patar]

Making roads safer should be about the roads themselves, not the users.

Dumbest thing I've ever read, I'm sorry, but that statement is a bunch of hogwash.

I'd rather drive on gravel roads with competent drivers than on pristine roads with idiots who don't know left or right.
Since when has a newly paved road prevented someone who goes into a corner hot/drunk/anything else from going over the center line and taking out oncoming vehicles?

Now you will say "better road surface means they will be able to tighten up the corner without losing control" blah blah blah BS.
A better corner means people will just go into it faster, it won't stop people from going in too fast.

Being too lazy to look up the stats, I would say the majority of road accidents are caused by driver error, not the road surface.

[Dave-]

the whole thing is irrelevant becuase more than 875 people break driving laws every day.

think a bout it, for every cop you see pulled over writing a ticket - how many PEOPLE do you see run a red light, speed, not give way?

[scumdog]

Not bitter at all toaster, please tell what it is I should be bitter about?
Do you know about some of my tickets that I don't?
Despite your reliance on it, clutching at straws is not really a good argument.



No, it is an appropriate example.
They do and should set the moral compass, like it or not.
As any leader should know, the most appropriate way to lead is by example. They are leaders and they set an example, whether or not you agree with it.

And no mummy, I wouldn't jump, I would however laugh at you for blindly jumping because someone passed a law telling you to.





The general principal of following a law simply because it is the law is overly simplistic and extreemly dangerous. I am not referring to traffic laws, but all laws. One should consider the law and its effects and implications and be prepared to disobey.

It is largely a given that power corrupts, as it does we tend to see more corrupt laws passed - for example laws limiting our right to free speach in an election year.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Are you really Dangerous Bastard???????????

[marty]

I don't have a problem with tickets when they are deserved. But to do a "shit, almost end of month and I need heaps of them written, better get busy" attitude has nothing to do with making the roads safer.

Serious question:

in the absence of having some performance indicators/KPI/KDRs linked to infringement outputs, how would you suggest traffic police officers are appraised/monitored?