the 5-0 can only pull over one car at a time so when he's busy with that one the rest can speed upto 100. he can't pull over everyone by himself. smack that radar on the windscreen and drive to the condition. it's rediculous everyone has to line up doing 90km/hr on a sunny dry day. thankfully we don't have that bs down in wellington. with 90k zone most people'll prob do 100k anyway, just like in the 100k zone, a majority sits at 105-110 until the radar goes off or till one gets stuck behind a campervan or bus or truck.the speedo needle might be saying you doing 90km but in fact you are really doing 95.it's not like the speedo accuracy is checked at wof time.
n1smo_gtir,
Jun 23, 5:41am
infact why not add judder bars per every 50-100m to stop boyracers so the govt can say they are tackling the war against boyracers too.
holden95,
Jun 23, 6:30am
Why is it that every Police officer does a dangerous action when you are around. You one of those wrapped kids in bubble wrap, its to cold outside, if you dont wear shoes.etc people.
holden95,
Jun 23, 6:35am
Just wondering why a parked vehicle on the side of the road would alter public safety anyway. Could be a school bus. If people drive safely then there would be no problem, speed camera vans and police cars don't cause accidents drivers do. Did you paint those lines there Jazz they are no connected either.
holden95,
Jun 23, 6:41am
Have to blame one link in the chain don't you and it is ALWAYS the police.you have a sad existance.perhaps you should organise a march in protest if your health is up to it.
smac,
Jun 23, 7:03am
Craig, you and Jazz, and a few others are missing my point completely.
At no time have I said that lowering the average speed to reduce the road is a good idea. In fact I think targeting speeding is done so at the cost of addressing the real problem. Until NZ drivers get formal, qualified instruction to get their licence, many of the problems will persist.
The point I have been trying to make is that just because we disagree with the METHOD of roll death reduction, doesn't automatically mean their GOAL is wrong. I genuinely believe (and all the actual evidence also points to) the fact that the Police goal is to reduce road trauma. Their simply is no evidence that they target speed for revenue. It's illogical, ineffective, and just wouldn't stand up to any inspection.
So if you can get past the ranting of a disgruntled few, the issue is not that they are targeting speed for any nefarious reason, it's simply that they are doing so because they are the puppet of misguided politicians.
Now, if there is one thing true of every single politician on this planet, it's that they are selective listeners. They will pick and choose what advice to follow, if it supports their own personal beliefs/goals.
Unfortunately for every study that shows lowering the speed limit won't work, there is another that shows it does work. So there you have it - there ARE studies that show that lowering the average speed will reduce fatalities, and t's cheaper to do than training drivers, and it gives the sheep the impression you care about the road toll, so you get elected. Win win win.
But give the revenue spiel a rest, it's tired, wrong, and wastes your time that could be spent on addressing the real problem.
pebbles61,
Jun 23, 11:34am
Ready to do a U-turn and slaughtera couple of bikers and walk away with a just a slap of a wet bus ticket. If anyone member of Joe-public had done that they'd have the book thrown at them. But since the flith was gonna give someone a ticket for breaking the speed limit, that makes it ok.
holden95,
Jun 23, 12:43pm
funny charged with same offence as anyone else and convicted in same court using same sentencing options yet there is a problem with that!
craigsmith,
Jun 23, 1:30pm
Of course it will, that is at the core of my slightly sardonic rant above. Keep reducing it until 0, that'll lower them fatalities. It's still a mischaracterization of the problem, a mistaking of a secondary contributing/complicating factor (speed) for a primary factor (dipshit x crossed the center line and dipshit y was following too closely). Continuing to follow this 'illogic' of addressing only complicating factors is what leads to lowest common denominator thinking, and further degradation of the license standards which are already terrible in NZ.
An idiocy that's nicely illustrated in Jazz's pictures - where even the normal limit of 100, much less 90, is clearly arbitrary and unnecessarily low. If people are managing to kill themselves on this road, the solution is to find the primary reason and police it, not to squelch the speed limit lower and lower until even a blind drunk retarded monkey can make it down the road safely. The latter doesn't solve the problem, in the long term probably exacerbates it by lowering the bar, and costs the country in all sorts of ways from economics to disenfranchisement with the police.
The rest of your post is clearly reasonable. I doubt 'revenue' is as big an issue as made out by some, although I suspect 'quotas' probably is. But I would say it's likely to be much more about what's easiest to police and lack of appropriate laws and enforcement guidelines.
thejazzpianoma,
Jun 23, 3:02pm
Nicely said craigsmith, couldn't agree more.
With regard to revenue and quota's you can argue the symantics of the exact reason until the cows come home. All that matters though is that its obvious the Police are being pushed to focus on issuing a high volume of tickets as opposed to tailoring their Policing to the local area/hazards with the intention of increasing safety.
If safety was a real focus there is no way that cop car would be sitting at the end of a passing lane with the intention of ripping out into a line of closely packed traffic.
nightsky1,
Jun 23, 3:06pm
"Closely packed traffic" eh
So you were tail gating as well as speeding ! Naughty Jazz No wonder you get a few infringements.
Take a deep breath, keep to the rules and you will find driving far more relaxing and safer.
thejazzpianoma,
Jun 23, 3:15pm
You clearly don't live in the real world. Tightly packed traffic is the nature of passing lanes. I didn't get a ticket and my excellent defensive driving habits actually prevented the Cop causing a pile up.
I also get very very few infringements. My gripe is the few I have gotten over the years have been for stupid and unreasonable reasons.
gedo1,
Jun 23, 4:24pm
. Ooops! your entry should read the other way around i.e. needle might be showing 95km but in fact you are really doing 90.Fact.Cheers tho.
gedo1,
Jun 23, 4:28pm
Hi again Jazz. I must have a look at some favourite bits of road using Google earth. Just shows I was not aware it covered all sorts of areas and not just the built up ones. Live and learn, eh!Stressing down today!
smac,
Jun 23, 4:38pm
Jazz even by only slightly screwing what has been said, you're showing you still completely miss the point.
Police are not pressured into issuing tickets. They are pressured into getting average speeds down. The easiest and most obvious way of doing that is by ticketing anyone above the set limit. I can see how you've fallen into mistaking these points, however it's been explained to you so many tomes now and you still don't get it, I gotta wonder.
n1smo_gtir,
Jun 23, 5:02pm
cheers for the correction=)
thejazzpianoma,
Jun 23, 5:41pm
Again, you are just arguing the semantics. It all amounts to the same thing, the Police are nit picking, spending their time catching out sensible motorists on technicalities while properly dangerous drivers go unchecked.
Worse still they have got so extreme in their efforts to enforce the letter of the law that they are actually causing serious road hazards like in this case.
All while we argue the semantics the problem goes unsolved.
smac,
Jun 23, 7:22pm
It's not semantics, it's a fundamental difference.
If you claimed that Police spend too much time and money cracking down overly harshly on trivial speed offences, I'd agree 100% with you.
But you don't say that. Every single chance you get you say they are doing all these things you disagree with, because they are revenue chasing.
That's a huge difference. It's also illogical, and plainly false considering how much it must cost them to do. Get a grip man.
thejazzpianoma,
Jun 23, 7:29pm
The income equates to 50% of the cost of roading police or up around 100 Million dollars a year.That's a HUGE subsidy, to say its a trivial amount and nothing to do with it is a big stretch.
dr.doolittle,
Jun 23, 7:52pm
I know the answer. STOP the revenue gathering & make up the shortfall buy cutting the sickness benefit by say.50%(minimum for a start). What do you say jaz!
smac,
Jun 24, 5:11pm
There you go again.show me where I said the amount collected is trivial!
Holy crap talking to you is like talking to my Pa when he has his hearing aid turned off.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.