Police news release - "Matching rider skills to their bikes"

[Bass]

Frankly, I despair.
God knows I've done my bit in the past, through motorcycle clubs and rider training...

The fact is that no matter what you or I do in our own way, is almost inevitably doomed to be for naught when some testosterone fueled dickwad pulls a wheelie on the motorway or some hairy goit pulls the muffler off of a cruiser.

I hear you but I actually don't think it's that hopeless.
I believe that what we need to achieve is an improvement in the PREVAILING view of our activity. We will never reach everybody and the Dickwads and the Goits will always be with us - it's inherent in the nature of our machinery; but lately, for every cager that does their level best to stop me from passing, I find there are 2 who pull over and help me through, especially if I don't try and force the issue.
I also think that a "Thanks mate" wave of aknowledgement as I barrel past, goes a long way to reinforcing that sort of interaction which is actually making it safer for all concerned.

If enough of us are overtly safe and courteous, it can sway public opinion despite the influence of the dicks - look at the change in attitude toward drunk driving over the last 2 decades

[Bass]

Katman, this isn't a dig, it's an honest question. What do you think will change if things carry on the way they are at this time?

This has been effectively answered by Oscar earlier in this thread but the message will stand repeating.

What concerns most of us who are preaching a bit more self control is that if we don't do it ourselves, then the politicians and civil servants will do it for us. We will be faced with regulations restricting the capacity of motorcycles (200 cc and less is not unknown overseas) and ever more punitive licencing/registration charges for starters.
Once the authorities get started down that track, it's almost impossible to put a stop to it.

[Jantar]

...I know that there has been an increase in accidents in older riders, but I thought that was mainly because there were more older riders and fewer younger ones than there used to be.

Hey! DO NOT let facts get in way of statistics.

[Oscar]

Is it true that those "of advanced age" are overrepresented in accident stats? What, exactly, do you mean by "overrepresented"? Does the number of accidents (per rider-kilometre or whatever) increase with age?

I know that there has been an increase in accidents in older riders, but I thought that was mainly because there were more older riders and fewer younger ones than there used to be.

The scariest statistic was one I saw six or seven years ago.
It said the average age of a motorcycle fatality had risen by 10 years (from about 29) in the previous decade.

[Oscar]

I hear you but I actually don't think it's that hopeless.
I believe that what we need to achieve is an improvement in the PREVAILING view of our activity. We will never reach everybody and the Dickwads and the Goits will always be with us - it's inherent in the nature of our machinery; but lately, for every cager that does their level best to stop me from passing, I find there are 2 who pull over and help me through, especially if I don't try and force the issue.
I also think that a "Thanks mate" wave of aknowledgement as I barrel past, goes a long way to reinforcing that sort of interaction which is actually making it safer for all concerned.

If enough of us are overtly safe and courteous, it can sway public opinion despite the influence of the dicks - look at the change in attitude toward drunk driving over the last 2 decades

I make a point of smiling and waving when I'm on my bike, particularly at kids, but also at drivers who pull over slightly when I'm passing, that sort of thing. What we have to work on is the idjut on the bike down the road passing down the white line against traffic..

[Bass]

I make a point of smiling and waving when I'm on my bike, particularly at kids, but also at drivers who pull over slightly when I'm passing, that sort of thing. What we have to work on is the idjut on the bike down the road passing down the white line against traffic..

Sad but true - looks like we're here for the long haul then.

[Ixion]

Well, statistical conclusions are only as good as the underlying data.

And if the data used by LTNZ to draw their conclusion that the road toll is all down to us old buffers is represented by that available on their web site, then the conclusions are very shonky indeed.

For a start, there's a lot of pretty important stuff missing. The LTNZ travel survey, touted as a major tool , completely ignores motorcycle travel. We don't figure at all!

Many of the other reports and tables ignore motorcycles altogether, or lump us in with trucks!

The "Crash statistics for motorcycles 2007" is a highly dodgy document, of very little statistical value.

However, we may examine it a little:

It shows breakdown of crashes, fatal and injury, by age group

(15-19) 2 fatal and 251 injury
(20-24) 5 fatal 174 "
(25-29) 1 121
(30-39) 15 238
(40+ ) 17 504

Now, let us assess these figures, against the background of the cry that senile old bikers are crashing left right and centre

First: The figures are deliberately misleading. For every other age group the breakdown is in 5 or 10 year bands. But ALL riders over 40 are lumped together.
Naturally that column is higher! When we recast it more legitimately we see

(15-40) 23 fatal, 884 injury
(40 + ) 17 504

Now the old buffers don't look so bad, do they ! Even then , it discriminates against the older rider, since 15 to 40 is 25 years and 40 + 25 would be 65. Plenty of riders older than 65, so the 40+ group still has a wider age range than the under 40 group.

Moreover, the Ministry cunningly skew the picture by quoting injuries rather than fatalities. Now bike injury figures will always be disproportionately high because (a) falling off a bike in even a minor way probably hurts somewhat; (b) when a rider does fall off some helpful soul always wants to call an ambulance. As soon as that happens it goes down as an injury crash, even if the conclusion is "You're OK mate, just a bit shaken"

Moreover, nowhere is there any indication of the make up of the rider group by age. Perhaps 40+ (yeah, you 41 year olds are considered 'older riders' by LTNZ) make up the majority of riders.

Certainly my observation is that the age groups are well skewed. There's quite a lot of young fellows, up to mid twenties. And quite a lot of 40+. Not many in between. They're to busy with families and too cash strapped. So just on the demographics we would expect to see the sort of picture we do.

So the "it's all down to old fools who can't control their bikes" looks to be a conclusion that (on the basis of published data - LTNZ may have more that they're not revealing , but I always suspect anything based on secret data ) that is hard to support. A predetermined conclusion , in fact, looking for a bit of sensationalism to justify itself.

What can be shown from the Ministry's own figures is that only a little over half (54 %) of the crashes were by full licence holders. One might argue (with a lot more validity) that the actual problem is inexperience, given that there are (I think - I'm open to the Ministry providing data to show me wrong) a lot more clas 6 licences in the country than 6L and 6R combined.


Nice folk indeed. I sense a witchhunt coming on.

[cheshirecat]

I think we're making a start right here.

Getting the message across that the "I couldn't give a fuck" attitude is precisely what is threatening the future of our motorcycling freedom is at the very foundation of making a change for the better.

Just a thought. We are always going to get good guy bad guy incidents on the roads, but occasionally things go well, the odd car who lets you in or stops and let you go. These I acknowledge with a wave especially those who let me pass and pass in a civilised manner. I think if one can reciprocate a little curtesy it makes their day, like that biker who waved at the kid in the back of car in another thread.

I think this makes a difference, and cars seeing bikers wave to each other.
A rider just injures themselves, but get a group of drunk hoons or warward ute!

[James Deuce]

A rider just injures themselves, but get a group of drunk hoons or warward ute!

No they don't. In 2003 a rider doing a runner from the cops had a head on with a car near Otaika and killed the passenger in the car on the way through the front windscreen and out the back. That's just one example, and I can dig up more. It doesn't matter that the dude was a drug crazed crim either, because it's quite usual for people to travel vastly quicker than the late unlamented Mr Brunton, and quite usual for people to lack the necessary situational awareness to even consider riding everywhere at warp speed.

It's not always the car's fault. Motorcyclists do hurt people other than themselves. There is no justification for consistently and continually flouting NZ's traffic regs.

The opportunities to enjoy your motorcycle and learn your own limits in a controlled situation are vastly more numerous than ever before. Hill Climbs, Sprints, Track Days, Rider education days at the track, riding courses run by people like RRRS, all huge fun in different ways.

I can't quite get why motorcyclists think the rules just don't apply. Like the utterly stupid little monkey on a CBR250rr on the way home tonight, who did license losing speeds past a speed camera that went off. O, how I laughed.

[Ocean1]

Um - they are not my friends - I do a little business with them and of course I'd like to do more... I'm reporting conversations with them in an effort to throw some light onto the topic. I couldn't really car a wit about the inventive ways we find to kill ourselves other than when it makes my riding more expensive.

Basically - this IS their business, they are responsible for road safety funding and effectively own the roads, you are playing in their playground and on their property, they MAKE the rules, how is this not their business?

I do agree with your second point - there should be an opt out clause for ACC etc. However the other side of that is when you need help and the ambulance turns up they may just say - sorry chum, none of our business, sort yerself out...

That's sorta my first point too, the effective ownership thing relies on the assumed liability for damages inferred by ACC. I never agreed to sign away responsibility for my actions. Damned if I'll allow the assumptiomn that I have to change the decisions I make.

And I'm perfectly happy to pay the cost of those decisions.

[Ocean1]

So if I am to avoid hypocracy, as long as I am ready to accept ACC, I cede to them the right to dictate (at least some of) the rules

Why? I didn't ask for it, but if they're charging me for it anyway why shouldn't I accept the service?

[Ocean1]

Whilst I am not seeking a floodlit racetrack like surface, I still think there is an inherent problem with specifying that we require more shit roads that fall apart, slump and generally require constant total resurfacing rather than paying more upfront and getting more durable less liable to subside roads.

So its essentially : user pays and likes it no matter the lack of standards or inconsistent adherence to them by the units purportedly responsible for road maintenance and improvement ?

Or think your riding to the conditions right up until you meet an untamed road anomaly ( caused by the above ) whilst getting three screens worths of bug build up and your eyeballs highbeam xenoned to death by a car , oh yeah and like it too as that was your choice as well.

P'raps, there's unfortunate design in a lot of our roading. Still, there's been incremental improvements for a bunch of years now...

[Ixion]

Utter codswallop.

I said the data was shonky. Now I'll go further and say it is an outright fabrication. A total lie in fact

I've done some more digging, and turned up the official MoT statistics

Which you can find at (three years because the article quotes three years)

2007
2006
2005

There's a lot of numbers, and vBulletin doesn't do number stoo well, so humour me

Total motor cycles crashes for the three years (injuries/fatalities)

2007 1336/41...... 2006 1019/38........2005 933/36

Now, the totals for Thames/Coromandel

2007 15/1............2006 10/1............2005 9/0

and Hauraki

2007 ..5/2............2006 7/0..............2005 5/0

Total, for the two districts, for the three years 51/4 . Out of a total of 3288/115. Anyone care to figure how 51 becomes 50 PER CENT of 3288. In fact it's about 1.5%.

And its not true about it being senile dodders either

From the same sources (just for 2007, cos I don't want to drown in figures, for all NZ)

0-19.. 258/5
20-24.168/6
25-29.119/1
30-34.110/5
35-39.122/10
40-44.119/3
45-49.132/6
50-54.110/4
55-59.69/2
60-64. 27/1
65-69.16/2
70+....14/2

Very clearly, the figures go into quite a sharp decline from the age of 50 onward. So much for that theory. The truth was masked of course in the published "Oh how wicked they are" document, by the clever way they amalgamated the ages groups.

And, there's more

OK, the total number of bike crashes and deaths ahs risen over the last three years. But, per 10000 bikes registered (same sources), it's actually gone down

2007 4.5%
2006 5.1%
2005 5.6%

We're getting BETTER not worse, the reverse of what they tried to tell us.

Now, either the people who put out this hogwash are totally incompetent (in which case they should be sacked): or they have deliberately lied to the public (in which case they should be sacked).

Admittedly, these are MoT figures, the article quoted "ACC claims". Which might include farm bike and off road injuries. But in that case they should not be used to attack road riders.

Either way I don't like it one bit. I don't like people who lie to me, I like it less when I am actually paying them to lie to me. And I like it least of all when they try to use those lies as excuses to take away my freedoms

BRONZ will be formally contacting Inspector Dunbier, to find the source of his claims. And seeking a formal retraction.

Nice people. Very nice indeed.

EDIT: His figure of 3.2 million dollars for the cost of motorcycles injuries is also very doubtful. Lianne Dalzeill (ex ACC Minister) is quoted as putting it at 52 million, which sounds more realistic. Given that taht would include farm and off road bikes, 2.2 million for Hauraki/Coromandel might be right. About 4%.

[Ocean1]

BRONZ will be formally contacting Inspector Dunbier

Sick 'em Les.

0-19.. 258/5
20-24.168/6
25-29.119/1
30-34.110/5
35-39.122/10
40-44.119/3
45-49.132/6
50-54.110/4
55-59.69/2
60-64. 27/1
65-69.16/2
70+....14/2

Interesting wee spike there at 35-39...

[Jantar]

Once again Ixion has come up with the goods.

There are so many data sources that the Powers-that-be can pick and choose how they present the data to give the impression they want. It is often easy to pick the fault with their claim, but without the true underlying data it is difficult to make substantila counter claims. Well done Les.