Is 6 months all a biker's life is worth? In the news today!

[James Deuce]

Where there is some volitional point at which behaviour can be altered, draconian punishment may work (though at an overall cost that society may not be prepared to tolerate). But where there is no volition, no malice, no realisation of negligence, even the most condign punishment will send no useful message.

I know what you are saying and in ideal circumstances I'm all for judging a case to suit and modifying (or removing) punishment as necessary. However volitional the bad decisions made by people who contributed to the three incidents I can relate personally, they essentially escaped even a reasonable punishment that would meet NZ's minimum punishments for driving under the influence.

I rather suspect that my real question, which always gets completely ignored whenever I bring it up keeps getting lost by the noise I create around the issue whenever it comes up.

Why does NZ society condone death and injury on the road to the point where it is seldom, if ever, felt necessary to punish the offender?

I don't accept that there is a difference between a professional and unprofessional licensed road user. The qualifications necessary to hold the license are the same for everyone. Surely everyone who uses the road should be aiming for the highest standards possible, and if they are incapable of meeting those, then they need regular competency based assessment? The only difference between a professional and "unprofessional" road user is experiential.

[jrandom]

Why does NZ society condone death and injury on the road to the point where it is seldom, if ever, felt necessary to punish the offender?

And my answer is, for the same reason it 'condones' (that term is hyperbole, but never mind) unintentional homicide in all forms.

Like your nursing example.

I don't necessarily advocate punishment, but I agree with your points regarding folk being qualified or unqualified to drive, and lengthy disqualifications followed by intensive (and expensive) training and certification would certainly be appropriate for any fatal on-road fuckups.

But jail terms? No point whatsoever in some cases. Recividist drunk drivers already get jail terms; perhaps they should be longer?

On an aside, I note that this issue, while apparently personally meaningful to you, wasn't important enough to get you to switch your vote away from the party that created the softcock sentencing regime we live under.

[yungatart]

No, she was a woman who made a tragic mistake and found herself on the wrong side of the road.

It wasn't a case of reckless use of a vehicle causing the death of another.

What about "personal responsibility" (TM Katman) or does that only apply to motorcyclists who make mistakes???

This site stinks of hypocrisy.

The site doesn't reek of hypocrisy..some members do...and you, Katman, would be the biggest culprit!

What about her personal responsibility for fucking up and klilling someone..and why aren't you pushing your barrow now?

Your double standards are showing..again!

[Katman]

Your double standards are showing..again!

Not at all.

(I was unaware that the woman had attempted to absolve herself of responsibility for the accident and that removes any sympathy I might have felt for her but.........)

The hypocrisy that I've alluded to is the attitude that seems to be displayed by so many on here that a car driver should be crucified for a tragic mistake yet they'll choose to conveniently ignore a (completely hypothetical - happy mods?) motorcyclist's act of recklessness that results in the death of someone else.

(And I don't include Jim in that hypocrisy - I know where he stands on the reckless behaviour of motorcyclists).

[Kiwibacon]

Heres what 1 of my American friends told me when I asked him about the penalties
Here in Chicago, we get senior citizens who drive up the sidewalk and plow through the people walking through the markets. They get a "Poor old guy probably got confused" and no revocation. Injuries and death are apparently of no consideration here when you can make yourself sound sympathetic it seems.

Or you could take my grandfather who drove his 33 foot motor home down the wrong side of the freeway (Thanks God no accident) and didn't get revoked or even a citation. Funny thing that Alzheimer's and the unwillingness for anyone to do anything about it.

[James Deuce]

And my answer is, for the same reason it 'condones' (that term is hyperbole, but never mind) unintentional homicide in all forms.

Like your nursing example.

That example is actually an example of the hypocrisy that has crept in to professional standards in NZ. As you know, Heather is a nurse and two of her classmates (from 25 years ago) have been jailed for manslaughter. Nurses are not exempt. The only reason the Wanganui Nurse "only" lost her registration, was because the tourist in question was already suffering from multiple health issues that were going to cause his death in the near future.

On an aside, I note that this issue, while apparently personally meaningful to you, wasn't important enough to get you to switch your vote away from the party that created the softcock sentencing regime we live under.

How do you know how I voted? Why do people leap to conclusions based on Internet posts?

[Badjelly]

OK James (Jim? Jim2, JD?) what do you think would be an appropriate punishment for the woman referred to in your original post?

[Mystic13]

Okay, I thought I'd join in this polarising argument...

1/ Our laws sentence on level of intention and that's why a bank robber gets more time than a white collar criminal who steals more because the later can usually argue they didn't intend to it just happened and snowballed due to stress gambling addictions or whatever.... I have opinions about this but I'll keep them out.

2/ If this lady had crashed into another car and a person had died I expect the law would have treated this the same. This is not a motorcyclist thing but a law thing.

3/ Is the law around driver responsibility too light. I think it is. If you don't make it clear and punish accordingly then people don't treat it so seriously. It's not at the front of peoples minds that there are stiff sentences for vehicular manslaugher and so they don't drive as defensively as they need to. IMHO.

Going through the Karangahake Gorge on the way to Napier this weekend (yes I know it's not the quick way but I'm on a bike and the ride was more important than the destination) the BMW in front of me had to drive half off the road to avoid a jerk who decided to pass cars going around a corner and coming toward us. For an instant I'm thinking "shit, what's the beemer driving doing he's going to crash off the road then I see the jerk in the car coming toward me and I join the beemer driver in diving left. My thoughts afterwards were if the Beemer and this guy collided I'd have struggled to find a piece of road to drive around on. This could have had a bad ending.

It's not in the public consciousness enough that they need to drive to protect themselves and other users. The person (jerk) that had made the bad move may have become impatient sitting behind cars, they may have made the move on one car only to find they sped up and closed the gap, they may have misjudged... There needs to be a greater awareness of respecting others on the road. If that awareness has to be bought about with tougher sentences then that's fine.

I think the driving mentallity here needs a good working over and maybe advertising campaigns are in order. In some countries, you can drive as slow as you want, but it's illegal to hold up more than 5 vehicles. The slow driver always pulls over.

We passed a cue of some 30 odd vehicles south of Tirau heading back to Auckland only to find a white hiace type van at the front of the cue doing 60kmph on the open road. On the back of the van was written in red spray can paint "Hug us We're German". I was thinking that would be the last thing many drivers behind them would want to do.

I feel for the family and partners loss. It's really sad. I can't comment on Cheryl Blair because I don't know the case and wasn't there. In some litigious cultures you're taught to deny all responsibility or you have insurance issues. It's possible Cheryl was following that form and then following local legal advice. The court system is adversarial and encourages division and denial.

There are many possible things going on. The question asked was do we need a change in terms of vehicle deaths and the answer is yes. It needs to come with sentencing and advertising and establishing a different attitiude.

Anyone up for a coffee? I'll have white and no sugar thanks.

[Quasievil]

boring ..........where is the unsubscribe button

[James Deuce]

Thread tools.

[gunrunner]

The law is fucked... hopefully the new government might have some ball to try and change things a bit.. we live in hope.

Only if John Keys rides , that is

[Swoop]

This site stinks of hypocrisy.

So you are leaving then?

Ta ta.

Bye.

[SPman]

I don't accept that there is a difference between a professional and unprofessional licensed road user. The qualifications necessary to hold the license are the same for everyone. Surely everyone who uses the road should be aiming for the highest standards possible, and if they are incapable of meeting those, then they need regular competency based assessment? The only difference between a professional and "unprofessional" road user is experiential.

And therein lies the problem. As long as you can generally steer a vehicle approximately on your side of the road at a speed at or lower than the proscribed limits, officialdom decrees you are an acceptable driver! As long as beauracracy has this view, and most of those in charge have similar standards of driving, anyone who "loses control" is looked on leniently...."oh you poor bastard....it could have happened to anyone", when, in a society that actually took driving seriously, the abysmally low standards of control and behaviour would be a number one priority! (NZ's not alone in this - Aus is just as bad)

I know how easy it is to drive onto the "wrong" side of the road in a foreign country...particularly if you are tired and revert to basic default settings, if only momentarily...(thank god drivers in Vegas are generally polite and laid back.......),but I don't see how a situation like this equates with a fuelled up driver running someone else down, in terms of demanding years in prison!

New Zealanders are all too keen to toss people inside for anything they can think of, and, under Key I see the "hang em high" and "throw away the key" brigade are now at full steam ahead! Guess he needs more contracts for construction firms to build more prisons.....

[imdying]

Always remember you are worthless when riding a motorcycle on a NZ road.

Unattractive thought or not, have you considered that, motorcyclist or not, your life actually is worthless.

[Pussy]

And therein lies the problem. As long as you can generally steer a vehicle approximately on your side of the road at a speed at or lower than the proscribed limits, officialdom decrees you are an acceptable driver! As long as beauracracy has this view, and most of those in charge have similar standards of driving, anyone who "loses control" is looked on leniently...."oh you poor bastard....it could have happened to anyone", when, in a society that actually took driving seriously, the abysmally low standards of control and behaviour would be a number one priority! (NZ's not alone in this - Aus is just as bad)

The general standard of driving skills in NZ is VERY low