No License

[Headbanger]

Hang on, what happened to the non-liscenced people being fuckwits? I'm confused.

I don't give a shit, if they have an accident or get caught, they have to deal it. As long as they're not hurting anyone in the process who really cares?

As far as I'm concerned its up to the person involved to judge if the risk is worth it, I'm not a cop, I don't care. Kind of pathetic to rage against the cops for doing their job if you do get get caught.

[MaxB]

snip

Here's what I would've answered..

According to Motorcycling stats over at Transport.govt.nz ...
In 2003 - 2007 23% of Motorcyclist Fatalities involved alcohol/drugs

3% of Motorcycle Fatalities were unlicensed......

45% of all Motorcycling fatalities involved travelling too fast for the conditions, or alcohol/drugs

There are a few holes in the stats in those reports. The Govt. has very selective vision esp. the previous one. The problem is the conclusions drawn from the figures are not obtained from an impartial source. The unlicensed category does not included lapsed learners or car licence holders riding etc. That is a 'wrong licence class'.

The stats also do not include 'illegal' riders that crash and flee the scene. It seems like the non/wrong licenced have fewer accidents. It is more likely that these go unreported.

The other thing is that the LTSA deliberatley mislead the public into thinking that 'too fast for the conditions' means 'exceeding the posted limit', where like all other western countries less than 10% of fatalities are from users over the speed limit and yet a huge amount of resources are devoted to stopping speeders.

If what happens in other places would happen here then a zero drink drive limit and compulsory driver training would be the 2 acts proven to reduce casualties. But maybe too many MPs are too fond of the grog for that to happen.

[Genestho]

snip

There are a few holes in the stats in those reports. The Govt. has very selective vision esp. the previous one. The problem is the conclusions drawn from the figures are not obtained from an impartial source. The unlicensed category does not included lapsed learners or car licence holders riding etc. That is a 'wrong licence class'.

The stats also do not include 'illegal' riders that crash and flee the scene. It seems like the non/wrong licenced have fewer accidents. It is more likely that these go unreported.

The other thing is that the LTSA deliberatley mislead the public into thinking that 'too fast for the conditions' means 'exceeding the posted limit', where like all other western countries less than 10% of fatalities are from users over the speed limit and yet a huge amount of resources are devoted to stopping speeders.

If what happens in other places would happen here then a zero drink drive limit and compulsory driver training would be the 2 acts proven to reduce casualties. But maybe too many MPs are too fond of the grog for that to happen.

Thanks MaxB, I don't doubt for a second what you're saying there!
I've found any stats can be manipulated to say what "you" want them to say...
I just plucked those off to try to assist vgcspares, and out of personal interest...

I think I have asked about before, as to whether there is independantly analised data out there - which seems common sense, that there should be.
Until then I guess if interested request info under Official information Act 1982. Or use what is available.

I have been informed there is availabilty of the "raw" data....which may, or may not make the information available a little clearer..
But again, as you say, not impartial perhaps.

MaxB. I'm intrigued as to what you consider, to be an impartial source...just out of interest...how would we get an impartial representation of the stats, in your opinion...?

[Subike]

Subjective post

Man with a full licence rides down the road with the attitude
" I have a licence, I can do what I want till I get caught, its just a fine"
So he rides at a speed just over the limit,
is not over cautious because he is insured,
can give the finger at others because he is licenced,
rides where the fuck he wants, when ever he wants ,
with the attitude he obtained the day he got his licence.
But because this man is "Licenced" he MUST b a safe rider!

Man without a licence rides down the road with the attitude
" I dont have a licence, I will be very carefull what I do"
So he rides at a speed just over the limit.
Is very cautious cause he dont have insurance,
Is polite and friendly to other road users,
Puts up with idiot drivers and never causes road rage,
Plans his rides to be sure he does not attract undue attention,
Has an attitue of" Be aware all the time of speed, traffic, other road users etc"
But because this man has NO licence, he MUST be a dangerous road user.

make your own assumptions

[MarkH]

Man with a full licence rides down the road with the attitude
" I have a licence, I can do what I want till I get caught, its just a fine"
So he rides at a speed just over the limit,
is not over cautious because he is insured,
can give the finger at others because he is licenced,
rides where the fuck he wants, when ever he wants ,
with the attitude he obtained the day he got his licence.
But because this man is "Licenced" he MUST b a safe rider!

Man without a licence rides down the road with the attitude
" I dont have a licence, I will be very carefull what I do"
So he rides at a speed just over the limit.
Is very cautious cause he dont have insurance,
Is polite and friendly to other road users,
Puts up with idiot drivers and never causes road rage,
Plans his rides to be sure he does not attract undue attention,
Has an attitue of" Be aware all the time of speed, traffic, other road users etc"
But because this man has NO licence, he MUST be a dangerous road user.

It sounds a bit too stressful to be like the 2nd man, I think overall I would prefer to be the first man to be totally honest. I like being able to ride where & when I want. I like that I can give people the finger, even if I don't generally decide to do so. The insurance is a nice safety net, though I still ride with some caution because I don't want to be hurt/killed.

So, am I a safe rider? Well I have a full license so *shrug*. I guess I am safer than some inexperienced riders and less safe than some with much more experience than me.

[Big Dave]

Pain of getting shit - licence, wof, insurance - together = small inconvenience.

Pain of shit hitting fan if circumstance conspire against = large snowball.

There is an age where this becomes self evident. It's called maturity.

[Sky-hi]

Just a piece of paper mate

a piece of paper that makes your insurance valid.

[dpex]

There are a surprising number (well surprising to me anyway) of people riding around on big bikes, without licences.

Back in the day, licences were issued by local authorities (like the Mt Albert Borough Council for example). In the mid-'80s there was a major restructuring, all those small boroughs ceased to exist, and licence records were lost by the hundreds. So now large numbers of people who used to ride in the '80s or earlier decide they will get a bike, but discover they have to go through the whole process again. They say, "bugger it! I'm not going to get a 250cc bike and a learner's permit!" So they don't. They just buy a big bike and ride it.

I know plenty of people like that, and for every one I know of there must be dozens of others. Not unusual at all.

The answer to the prob is simple. Call LTNZ. Tell them when and where you got your licence and respectfully ask them to find it. They'll give you a case-number which you produce to the next cop who pulls you over.

The liability is all theirs (LTNZ). Their records are a shambles due to the various changes in licence type over the years and, no doubt, INCIS.

That some local authority or local MOT unit's records have been lost is not your issue.

Your licence is like the Treaty Of Waitangi. It was writ and therefore it holds good to this day and beyond.

I'm in exactly this space at the moment and I will fight to my last breath to have the authorities return my motorbike and semi-trailer licences. Both of which appear to have never existed.

I guess I'm a bit luckier than most, as regards my bike licence. I can still remember the name of the MOT cop who tested me and handed it out. And guess what? The guy still works the AK Motorway patrol.

But even I didn't have that I'd still fight to the death. A one-man hikoi, maybe. But my licences to do all manner of things, from fishing to riding, are my own Treaties with the authorities, and no bastard is going to defraud me of any of them simply because some grey-faced worm employed by the politbureau screwed up.

[lankyman]

man on brand new 800cc+ black bike dressed in black but with dayglo vest for safety ... and no bike license

wonder what the "lock up all the alchos and she'll be right" brigade will think of that ?

Were you wasted when you posted this thread?

[dpex]

Subjective post

Man with a full licence rides down the road with the attitude
" I have a licence, I can do what I want till I get caught, its just a fine"
So he rides at a speed just over the limit,
is not over cautious because he is insured,
can give the finger at others because he is licenced,
rides where the fuck he wants, when ever he wants ,
with the attitude he obtained the day he got his licence.
But because this man is "Licenced" he MUST b a safe rider!

Man without a licence rides down the road with the attitude
" I dont have a licence, I will be very carefull what I do"
So he rides at a speed just over the limit.
Is very cautious cause he dont have insurance,
Is polite and friendly to other road users,
Puts up with idiot drivers and never causes road rage,
Plans his rides to be sure he does not attract undue attention,
Has an attitue of" Be aware all the time of speed, traffic, other road users etc"
But because this man has NO licence, he MUST be a dangerous road user.

make your own assumptions

I think you are absolutely correct. Nobody in his right mind...except maybe a Harly rider....is going to set him/herself up for the big fall.

Consider the penalties. 1. No licence. 2. No L plate. 3. Getting busted for 111Kph in a 100Kph means you get busted for doing 41Kph over 'your' limit. That's 28 days on the bus plus the loss of bike, plus the fine, plus, plus, plus.

So which rider will take greater care? The one with bugger all to lose but a few hundred bucks or he/she who could lose big-time?

Oddly, at some level, the LTNZ should encourage non-licenced riders to ride on account of they will be way more attentive than a number of licenced riders.

Funny cunundrum, eh?

[MaxB]

Thanks MaxB, I don't doubt for a second what you're saying there!
I've found any stats can be manipulated to say what "you" want them to say...
I just plucked those off to try to assist vgcspares, and out of personal interest...

I think I have asked about before, as to whether there is independantly analised data out there - which seems common sense, that there should be.
Until then I guess if interested request info under Official information Act 1982. Or use what is available.

I have been informed there is availabilty of the "raw" data....which may, or may not make the information available a little clearer..
But again, as you say, not impartial perhaps.

MaxB. I'm intrigued as to what you consider, to be an impartial source...just out of interest...how would we get an impartial representation of the stats, in your opinion...?

Hi TGW

I think we can trust the raw numbers that are in the references of the LTSA web page eg total number of riders, accidents and fatalities. These are obtained by Govt statisticians.

The problem arises when you try to assign categories to the data. This is where the figures can be manipulated by the LTSA. As you say the stats can tell us anything we want to hear.

Statistics NZ are the most trusted statistical body in the country but they do not cover direct motoring stats. That is done by the LTSA. There was a time when SNZ was all powerful but under the last Govt. the wings were clipped so much they are a shadow of their former selves.

The nearest thing we have is an organisation like the AA and from time to time they do challenge the Govt. view. Sometimes Consumer go after the Govt. on motoring issues. But they do not commission research AFAIK.

Overseas there are organisations like the US Center for Automotive Research and the UKs MIRA which are paid for by levies on carmakers. They can be called upon to pass comment on their Govt. plans and offer another point of view.

Commissioned research and analysis undertaken by a Crown Research Institute (for example) can cost up to $200/hr. So that makes it unlikely we would get much impartial analysis done on anything unless you know someone with deep pockets.