The Police PR message about our 2011 roadtoll

So can we have the names and addresses of the people who didn't die!

You don't seem to understand the point.

You seem to be confusing things like one person crashing a new Mercedes and another crashing an old Hiace (which will even out) with factors like the fleet as a whole becoming newer/safer which will not even out.

You also don't seem to understand that economic conditions play a huge factor in road crashes and this also ties in with the need to measure in crashes per km driven.

For example, when fuel is expensive and times are tough, not only do people do less mileage but the trips they tend to cut down on are the family sunday drives and trips away where the car is full. Mum or Dad driving to work with just them in the car tends to still happen regardless. So not only are less miles being driven but when there is a crash less people are killed because there are less people in the car.

To put it simply, its the things that change between years (like economic conditions, age of the fleet) that matter. Not the variances between individual crashes which even themselves out. You don't seem to distinguish between the two.

"Sometimes the most simple are the best" does not even come close to being applicable here and that's precisely the non-thinking approach they are hoping the general public will accept. That way they can spin whatever they want from the statistics to push any agenda they choose.

Again you miss the point.
Of course statistics can be collected and analised properly to draw a fairly accurate conclusion.

What Socram is referring to is when the Police come on T.V and make absurd statements that couldn't possibly be scientifically concluded from the data available. So none of the process you describe has been followed.

The classic example is when the Police go on television and pretend that the crash results from one weekend prove this or that about their road safety campaign.

Not only should any 12 year old be able to tell you that one weekend does not make a big enough sample to prove anything. But conditions such as weather, economic conditions, the price of fuel etc need to be taken into account as well.

you are just repeating yourself, and not reading my post, what you are saying is not far from what i said, you just cant see it.

you miss the point, completely, again,most likely because you dont want to see it. You are reading into his pst what you want to read and giving him too much credit, instead of just reading the post.

Well I don't care if the police take credit or not, the road toll this holiday season is the best since 1956/57 which is fantastic, zero of course would have been best, there are still some unhappy families out there, but not as many as there could have been. Well done people!
http://sunlive.co.nz/news/37111-record-low-holiday-road-toll.html

I've read this at least three times and cannot see where the Police are taking credit for anything.Indeed the spokesman congratulates the motorists. i.e. you and me!(Quote from NZ Herald today Thursday) "A record low holiday road toll has been welcomed but more efforts are needed to continue to improve road safety, say police.

Six people died on New Zealand roads over the official Christmas/New Year holiday period - the lowest toll since records began more 50 years ago.

The first holiday road fatality came on Christmas Day, when Chinese national Rongmei Wang was killed in a two-car collision in Hamilton. On Boxing Day, Shane Curtis Tosh, 24, died when his Honda left the Dacre-Lorneville road north of Invercargill. Hours later a 58-year old Taumaranui man died when his car careered down a bank.

On December 24, a 22-year-old man was killed at Ngapara, near Oamaru, when he lost control of his car which then slammed into a tree.

An 81-year-old woman died in hospital following a New Year's Eve crash north of Auckland, while early on New Year's Day a 29-year-old man was killed when he was hit by a taxi while walking in Levin.

The holiday road toll was the lowest toll since records for holiday periods began in 1956/57 - the previous lowest was eight in 1959/60, while the highest was 37 in 1972/73.

Last year's holiday road toll was 19.

The holiday period ran from 4pm on Christmas Eve through to 6am today.

"This year's holiday toll shows that drivers have been taking responsibility, and focusing when behind the wheel," Associate Transport Minister Simon Bridges said.

"However, every fatality and serious injury on the road is a tragedy for the families and loved ones of those involved.

"It is important we continue to work hard in 2013 to ensure even fewer suffer the consequences of road death or injury."

Superintendent Carey Griffiths, national manager of road policing, was pleased with the low toll. However, she said six deaths were still too many.

"Well done to all drivers who said no to alcohol, wore their seatbelts, stuck to the speed limits and drove attentively. Their decisions impact all of us and have contributed to this result," Mr Griffiths said. "Of course it's fantastic to see the numbers continuing to trend down but as our staff know, that's still six people whose families must be informed of a terrible tragedy."

Last year's preliminary road of 307 was the second lowest in 60 years. The lowest, 284, was recorded in 2011.

With many people expected to drive home this weekend, Mr Griffiths urged people to take care on the roads.

"We can all make sure our friends and whanau wear their seatbelts. We can ask people driving to slow down," he said. "Sober driving is critical to keeping safe. Don't tolerate your mates drinking and driving, and never get into a car with a driver who's been drinking.

"These are basics, but they save people's lives."

- nzherald.co.nz and APNZ"
Too many of us leap in and find any excuse to lambast the Police for the job they do and, worse, many use their own agendas, untruths, unsupported statements of facts and figures, and doubtful experiences to bolster their thin rants.(.and that's MY rant over for the present!)

.and this sums it up completely!Well said!

If you KNOW what causes accidents is indeed the critical question.So we are told speeding kills, so they enforce their somewhat arbitrary limits.They think that speed is the major key.
So why is it that when there was a fuel crisis a few years ago and they lowered the speed limits to "reduce fuel usage", that the accident rates rose!Or that in the USA, when they lifted the blanket 55mph limit, accidents reduced!Or, on many UK motorways where the police usually turned a blindeye to speeding, the accident rate was lower than other roads, yet our own police spokespeople are totally fixated on speed!

The real problem with speed is that it is bad drivers who are unable to read the road well enough to assess a true and safe speed - and it may not be above the posted limits either. The high number of single car accidents is the real pointer- driver error, pure and simple.

I am sure that there are many posters on here who have never fallen off the road or crossed over the centre line, due to excess speed, despite driving cars that had poor roadholding compared to today's cars/tyres, but they will admit to exceeding the posted limits.
Equally, there will also be posters on here who will admit to falling off the road more than once due to driver error.

If you take away a vehicle mechanical type failure (e.g. a wheel falling off or a major brake failure etc) or a sudden road failure of some sort or an unexpected spillage of oil; for example, you are left with the competence or incompetence of drivers.And that is the major contributor to vehicle incidents that result in crashes injuries and deaths.So it is recognised that driver ability in all sorts of conditions and circumstances that is the major cause.Some people can recognise that for themselves and drive according to the conditions and exercise tolerance and restraint.If we were all like that there would be no need for road rules and all of that.But we are NOT so there have to be rules that govern what we do. Speed!Have a crash at a lower speed and the chances of surviving are greater than they would be at a higher speed, and that would seem to be why there is a need to have such limits.

yea your right gedo1, just need to talk to the fire fighters and ambulance and hospital staff who are sick of repairing car crash victims, the faster you go the bigger the mess, the bigger the tax payer dollars.

Yes, the bigger the tax payer dollars. Just to fix on this point for a second, these drunken/drugged idiots cause enough damage and huge cost to everyone, yet they still get themselves medically fixed up for free, at our expense. I wonder if they could be given the bill for all expenses incurred to fix up their carnage. Would be a more worthwhile method of 'revenue collecting'!

your not caring is irrelevant

the stance the police take, & their lack of credit taking when things go south is what the whole thread is about

BS monetary fine regime justification & BS credit taking despite widely recognised factors have been how the NZ police force operates

they are allowed by the pollies to milk road users for money - thats ok, we all voted them into power afterall

but if they want respect, then they need to start being honest over the reasons why

yeah

like people leaving NZ during the same period

aye

Bullshit our drink drive limit is .08 much higher than other countries .05 was deemed the drink drive limit in OZ more than 20 years ago but here Nar let the drunks drive it will be ok

Are people between .05 and .08 the majority of accident causers!

^^ Welldown here they say its the repeat offenders mostly & way over limit& it was their driving thatgave them awaymore thancheckpoints

I see you have come back to your post wrong2, Way back at post #15 I asked you the above question, all you do is continue to knock, do you have anything positive to contribute!

i think what's important is that we are provided with um an accurate 'picture'!
today's police have an absolute obssession with all things traffic consuming enormous resources. (& dragging in huge revenue)if you take the incrediblevolume of traffic on the road today with 20 yrs ago (road deaths) i think you'll find the reality to be we now have a comparitively lower rate.the devil is in the detail.

so different cars shou.d have different speed limits then, rather than the current 'arbitury' ones,makes complete sense, to enforce speeds that are different for everyone.yup.einstein.-
.great way to regulate behavior, maybe get radars that can tune into driver ability, vehicle type and tyres and give a reading based on what it decides! Yup.brilliant.just brilliant.

Not what I said at all - you are making this up!

Arbitrary refers to the speed limits.Who decided that 100kph on anopen road in Southland was OK but 105 is dangerous!Why is it that Hamilton can happily post 60kph limits in various places, but Greater Auckland can't!They are arbitrary speed limits without any research as to what is safe.
If you drive long distances regularly, which you may well do, then you'll know that at low speeds,more people exceed the posted limits - even in built up areas, than they do on the open road, where many are 15 to 20kph below the posted higher limits.The higher the speed limits on the open road, the fewer people adhere to it, (under rather than over) so overtaking is often a nightmare without exceeding that arbitrary limit.

Even Australia manages extensive stretches of road at 110kph.

I drive or have driven old cars, new cars, trucks, motorbikes, people movers, passenger vans and just about anything else that I am legally allowed to, left hand drive countries and right hand drive countries, even on snow and ice and have never yet managed to fall off the road.(I have fallen off the race track over the last 40 years, but that is not the same thing at all!)
All I am saying is that the majority of accidents are caused by the drivers and unfortunately too many are just not good drivers.I don't claim to be perfect - far from it, but coming up to 50 years of driving I have seen enough and read enough to know that driving is to be taken seriously -and far too many don't take it at all seriously and don't try to improve once they get their licence.