Do we have an excess of road policing in New Zealand?

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Do we have an excess of road policing in New Zealand?

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1407819 16-Oct-2015 12:38

MikeB4:
graemeh:
MikeB4: On our network we had a programme that forced rest beaks, the computer forced micro pauses and after x number of pauses a minutes rest break was forced. Now from memory those computers did not kill anyone yet we had this in place for safety.

That is another idea that seems like a good idea until you actually try using it.

Any tool like that MUST have a user override for those scenarios where the rest break must be delayed. Imagine if you're fixing a problem that is costing $200k per minute, you are seconds away from fixing, that one minute compulsory pause just cost $200k. You're printing a document for an important meeting and seconds before you hit print your PC locks up.

Certain staff on approval could delay the rest break for that exact circumstance.

In a vehicle this could be First responders, Police, Fire doctors etc

I seem to remember WINZ having a system like that... didn't they remove it because it was causing stress?

Matthew

Jase2985

13459 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1407820 16-Oct-2015 12:39

MikeB4:
Kyanar:
MikeB4:
graemeh:
MikeB4: On our network we had a programme that forced rest beaks, the computer forced micro pauses and after x number of pauses a minutes rest break was forced. Now from memory those computers did not kill anyone yet we had this in place for safety.

That is another idea that seems like a good idea until you actually try using it.

Any tool like that MUST have a user override for those scenarios where the rest break must be delayed. Imagine if you're fixing a problem that is costing $200k per minute, you are seconds away from fixing, that one minute compulsory pause just cost $200k. You're printing a document for an important meeting and seconds before you hit print your PC locks up.

Certain staff on approval could delay the rest break for that exact circumstance.

In a vehicle this could be First responders, Police, Fire doctors etc

How exactly does it help? "Oh my car has stopped. I'd best call the Fire Service and waste hours of police time to get to me to tell my car to start up again so I can get out of this storm". And let's not even look at the risks imposed by introducing yet another system into the CAN bus with direct control over the engine power that can be compromised.

Face it, it's a stupid idea. The fatigue problem can and should be solved the same way that the speed and drink driving problems are being addressed. Education, social pressure, and enforcement.

If you read again what I wrote I did not say the device would bring a vehicle to a stop, I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken

lol and cause more issues by having a slow car in a inappropriate place, or having people pulled over on the side of the motorway (which is illegal)

sorry to say but its an utterly stupid idea

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1407829 16-Oct-2015 12:54

Jase2985:
MikeB4:
Kyanar:
MikeB4:
graemeh:
MikeB4: On our network we had a programme that forced rest beaks, the computer forced micro pauses and after x number of pauses a minutes rest break was forced. Now from memory those computers did not kill anyone yet we had this in place for safety.

That is another idea that seems like a good idea until you actually try using it.

Any tool like that MUST have a user override for those scenarios where the rest break must be delayed. Imagine if you're fixing a problem that is costing $200k per minute, you are seconds away from fixing, that one minute compulsory pause just cost $200k. You're printing a document for an important meeting and seconds before you hit print your PC locks up.

Certain staff on approval could delay the rest break for that exact circumstance.

In a vehicle this could be First responders, Police, Fire doctors etc

How exactly does it help? "Oh my car has stopped. I'd best call the Fire Service and waste hours of police time to get to me to tell my car to start up again so I can get out of this storm". And let's not even look at the risks imposed by introducing yet another system into the CAN bus with direct control over the engine power that can be compromised.

Face it, it's a stupid idea. The fatigue problem can and should be solved the same way that the speed and drink driving problems are being addressed. Education, social pressure, and enforcement.

If you read again what I wrote I did not say the device would bring a vehicle to a stop, I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken

lol and cause more issues by having a slow car in a inappropriate place, or having people pulled over on the side of the motorway (which is illegal)

sorry to say but its an utterly stupid idea

It would take time to get down to 20%, I love the selective comprehension

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1407836 16-Oct-2015 12:59

MikeB4:
Jase2985:
MikeB4:
Kyanar:
MikeB4:
graemeh:
MikeB4: On our network we had a programme that forced rest beaks, the computer forced micro pauses and after x number of pauses a minutes rest break was forced. Now from memory those computers did not kill anyone yet we had this in place for safety.

That is another idea that seems like a good idea until you actually try using it.

Any tool like that MUST have a user override for those scenarios where the rest break must be delayed. Imagine if you're fixing a problem that is costing $200k per minute, you are seconds away from fixing, that one minute compulsory pause just cost $200k. You're printing a document for an important meeting and seconds before you hit print your PC locks up.

Certain staff on approval could delay the rest break for that exact circumstance.

In a vehicle this could be First responders, Police, Fire doctors etc

How exactly does it help? "Oh my car has stopped. I'd best call the Fire Service and waste hours of police time to get to me to tell my car to start up again so I can get out of this storm". And let's not even look at the risks imposed by introducing yet another system into the CAN bus with direct control over the engine power that can be compromised.

Face it, it's a stupid idea. The fatigue problem can and should be solved the same way that the speed and drink driving problems are being addressed. Education, social pressure, and enforcement.

If you read again what I wrote I did not say the device would bring a vehicle to a stop, I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken

lol and cause more issues by having a slow car in a inappropriate place, or having people pulled over on the side of the motorway (which is illegal)

sorry to say but its an utterly stupid idea

It would take time to get down to 20%, I love the selective comprehension

Some people can drive quite a long time before getting tired, some can only manage an hour or so. Who sets the time, why should those more capable once again have to suffer because of the lowest common denominator.

Matthew

Jase2985

13459 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1407837 16-Oct-2015 13:02

how do you know when someone got up, how much sleep they got the night before, how was the sleep quality?

its not selective comprehension, you said "I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken"

what happens if someone chooses to ignore it? if people have to stop to reset it where will they stop?

your idea is stupid, actually sit there and think about it.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1407883 16-Oct-2015 13:44

Jase2985: how do you know when someone got up, how much sleep they got the night before, how was the sleep quality?

its not selective comprehension, you said "I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken"

what happens if someone chooses to ignore it? if people have to stop to reset it where will they stop?

your idea is stupid, actually sit there and think about it.

It is easy, if you have been driving constantly for say 2 hours the computer can display a message to have a break, if after a designated time the vehicle has not been stopped for say 10 minutes then power reduction would commence dropping at a rate of
10% every 10 minutes to a minimum of 20%. Driver fatigue has nothing to do with sleep patterns the night before if it did truck drivers would not need the restrictions on them.

If they choose to ignore which one would have to be a very bad driver to do so the trip would have to be completed at 20% power all for stubbiness.

It is no different to having limiters on certain vehicles.

Right now I cannot think of a road in NZ where one cannot stop safely after a certain travel time to have a rest.

Question, why is it stupid to try and find ways to save lives and save the country huge cost ?

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1407887 16-Oct-2015 13:51

MikeB4:
Jase2985: how do you know when someone got up, how much sleep they got the night before, how was the sleep quality?

its not selective comprehension, you said "I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken"

what happens if someone chooses to ignore it? if people have to stop to reset it where will they stop?

your idea is stupid, actually sit there and think about it.

It is easy, if you have been driving constantly for say 2 hours the computer can display a message to have a break, if after a designated time the vehicle has not been stopped for say 10 minutes then power reduction would commence dropping at a rate of
10% every 10 minutes to a minimum of 20%. Driver fatigue has nothing to do with sleep patterns the night before if it did truck drivers would not need the restrictions on them.

If they choose to ignore which one would have to be a very bad driver to do so the trip would have to be completed at 20% power all for stubbiness.

It is no different to having limiters on certain vehicles.

Right now I cannot think of a road in NZ where one cannot stop safely after a certain travel time to have a rest.

Question, why is it stupid to try and find ways to save lives and save the country huge cost ?

It isn't stupid to try to do that. But, it must be balanced against freedom. If you tighten up all the laws so that everything becomes safe or everyone becomes monitored you end up with a society that is no longer free.

Personally I would rather live in a free society where there some danger of dying every day than live in a Police State where I have no freedom but am perfectly safe

Matthew

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1407888 16-Oct-2015 13:54

mdooher:
MikeB4:
Jase2985: how do you know when someone got up, how much sleep they got the night before, how was the sleep quality?

its not selective comprehension, you said "I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken"

what happens if someone chooses to ignore it? if people have to stop to reset it where will they stop?

your idea is stupid, actually sit there and think about it.

It is easy, if you have been driving constantly for say 2 hours the computer can display a message to have a break, if after a designated time the vehicle has not been stopped for say 10 minutes then power reduction would commence dropping at a rate of
10% every 10 minutes to a minimum of 20%. Driver fatigue has nothing to do with sleep patterns the night before if it did truck drivers would not need the restrictions on them.

If they choose to ignore which one would have to be a very bad driver to do so the trip would have to be completed at 20% power all for stubbiness.

It is no different to having limiters on certain vehicles.

Right now I cannot think of a road in NZ where one cannot stop safely after a certain travel time to have a rest.

Question, why is it stupid to try and find ways to save lives and save the country huge cost ?

It isn't stupid to try to do that. But, it must be balanced against freedom. If you tighten up all the laws so that everything becomes safe or everyone becomes monitored you end up with a society that is no longer free.

Personally I would rather live in a free society where there some danger of dying every day than live in a Police State where I have no freedom but am perfectly safe

I agree, you are free to purchase a car, drive the car but that freedom does not extend to placing other lives at risk by your actions. Risking others impinges on their rights.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1407892 16-Oct-2015 14:00

MikeB4:
mdooher:
MikeB4:
Jase2985: how do you know when someone got up, how much sleep they got the night before, how was the sleep quality?

its not selective comprehension, you said "I suggested a device that reduces the power output progressively down to 20% until a rest break is taken"

what happens if someone chooses to ignore it? if people have to stop to reset it where will they stop?

your idea is stupid, actually sit there and think about it.

It is easy, if you have been driving constantly for say 2 hours the computer can display a message to have a break, if after a designated time the vehicle has not been stopped for say 10 minutes then power reduction would commence dropping at a rate of
10% every 10 minutes to a minimum of 20%. Driver fatigue has nothing to do with sleep patterns the night before if it did truck drivers would not need the restrictions on them.

If they choose to ignore which one would have to be a very bad driver to do so the trip would have to be completed at 20% power all for stubbiness.

It is no different to having limiters on certain vehicles.

Right now I cannot think of a road in NZ where one cannot stop safely after a certain travel time to have a rest.

Question, why is it stupid to try and find ways to save lives and save the country huge cost ?

It isn't stupid to try to do that. But, it must be balanced against freedom. If you tighten up all the laws so that everything becomes safe or everyone becomes monitored you end up with a society that is no longer free.

Personally I would rather live in a free society where there some danger of dying every day than live in a Police State where I have no freedom but am perfectly safe

I agree, you are free to purchase a car, drive the car but that freedom does not extend to placing other lives at risk by your actions. Risking others impinges on their rights.

Every time we drive on the road we put others at risk, just as they do to us. In our society we accept that risk. I can drive on normal road for 4 hours at a time without increasing the risk to others beyond what a normal person would consider acceptable. forcing someone (even me) to stop for 10 min every 2 hours will result in them (and me) taking greater risks to make up the perceived delay.

Matthew

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1407912 16-Oct-2015 14:57

MikeB4:

It is easy, if you have been driving constantly for say 2 hours the computer can display a message to have a break, if after a designated time the vehicle has not been stopped for say 10 minutes then power reduction would commence dropping at a rate of
10% every 10 minutes to a minimum of 20%. Driver fatigue has nothing to do with sleep patterns the night before if it did truck drivers would not need the restrictions on them.

If they choose to ignore which one would have to be a very bad driver to do so the trip would have to be completed at 20% power all for stubbiness.

It is no different to having limiters on certain vehicles.

Right now I cannot think of a road in NZ where one cannot stop safely after a certain travel time to have a rest.

Question, why is it stupid to try and find ways to save lives and save the country huge cost ?

Who determines what an acceptable "designated time" is? You? Some people are more capable than others - the solution is not bad technical decisions like you're advocating. The solution is education and enforcement - people need to take responsibility for their own actions, and I'm really sick of people advocating technical and legislative decision-making.

It's not stupid to try and find ways to save lives. It's stupid to come up with bad ideas to save lives that won't actually save lives. You can cause an accident at kill people at 40km/h too. And if you end up at 40km/h on a long motorway, you're guaranteed to cause an accident. Face it, it's still a really stupid idea. And that's not ignoring the risk of yet another system attached to the CAN bus with control over the engine that can be compromised.

MikeB4:

I agree, you are free to purchase a car, drive the car but that freedom does not extend to placing other lives at risk by your actions. Risking others impinges on their rights.

By that logic, you may as well install limiters in a vehicle that disables the engine entirely as soon as a human sits in the car seat, as a vehicle moving at all places lives at risk. Actually, we should enforce laws requiring citizens to get permission to leave the house as well as that puts others at risk.

You may be happy to significantly curtail people's freedom in order to minimally decrease risk mere rounding errors of a percentage point, most of society is not. Thankfully, you are not in a position to make that call.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1407924 16-Oct-2015 15:31

Kyanar:
MikeB4:

It is easy, if you have been driving constantly for say 2 hours the computer can display a message to have a break, if after a designated time the vehicle has not been stopped for say 10 minutes then power reduction would commence dropping at a rate of
10% every 10 minutes to a minimum of 20%. Driver fatigue has nothing to do with sleep patterns the night before if it did truck drivers would not need the restrictions on them.

If they choose to ignore which one would have to be a very bad driver to do so the trip would have to be completed at 20% power all for stubbiness.

It is no different to having limiters on certain vehicles.

Right now I cannot think of a road in NZ where one cannot stop safely after a certain travel time to have a rest.

Question, why is it stupid to try and find ways to save lives and save the country huge cost ?

Who determines what an acceptable "designated time" is? You? Some people are more capable than others - the solution is not bad technical decisions like you're advocating. The solution is education and enforcement - people need to take responsibility for their own actions, and I'm really sick of people advocating technical and legislative decision-making.

It's not stupid to try and find ways to save lives. It's stupid to come up with bad ideas to save lives that won't actually save lives. You can cause an accident at kill people at 40km/h too. And if you end up at 40km/h on a long motorway, you're guaranteed to cause an accident. Face it, it's still a really stupid idea. And that's not ignoring the risk of yet another system attached to the CAN bus with control over the engine that can be compromised.

MikeB4:

I agree, you are free to purchase a car, drive the car but that freedom does not extend to placing other lives at risk by your actions. Risking others impinges on their rights.

By that logic, you may as well install limiters in a vehicle that disables the engine entirely as soon as a human sits in the car seat, as a vehicle moving at all places lives at risk. Actually, we should enforce laws requiring citizens to get permission to leave the house as well as that puts others at risk.

You may be happy to significantly curtail people's freedom in order to minimally decrease risk mere rounding errors of a percentage point, most of society is not. Thankfully, you are not in a position to make that call.

Is it really that much different to requiring Seat Belts, child restraints, Motorcycle and Bicycle helmets, Airbags, indicators etc etc ...

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1407999 16-Oct-2015 17:56

MikeB4:

Is it really that much different to requiring Seat Belts, child restraints, Motorcycle and Bicycle helmets, Airbags, indicators etc etc ...

Yes, actually, it's vastly different. A strawman argument if ever I've seen one. For a start, not one of those things applies an objective test to a subjective situation. We know for a fact what happens if your head hits the ground when you're biking. We know for a fact what happens when your head hits the steering wheel in a crash. We know for a fact what happens when a baby flies through the windshield. We don't know when someone's fatigued, because it's not objective - every individual is different, so making a statement that no-one should be allowed to drive for more than two hours or their car gets shut down is silly.

And you still fail to answer for the fact that any system that spontaneously takes control of the power (and maximum speed) of a vehicle actually creates more of an accident risk. And the additional risk putting another component (that anyone with any sense whatsoever is going to disconnect) onto the CAN bus in control of the engine is going to be a concern.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1408006 16-Oct-2015 18:18

Kyanar:
MikeB4:

Is it really that much different to requiring Seat Belts, child restraints, Motorcycle and Bicycle helmets, Airbags, indicators etc etc ...

Yes, actually, it's vastly different. A strawman argument if ever I've seen one. For a start, not one of those things applies an objective test to a subjective situation. We know for a fact what happens if your head hits the ground when you're biking. We know for a fact what happens when your head hits the steering wheel in a crash. We know for a fact what happens when a baby flies through the windshield. We don't know when someone's fatigued, because it's not objective - every individual is different, so making a statement that no-one should be allowed to drive for more than two hours or their car gets shut down is silly.

And you still fail to answer for the fact that any system that spontaneously takes control of the power (and maximum speed) of a vehicle actually creates more of an accident risk. And the additional risk putting another component (that anyone with any sense whatsoever is going to disconnect) onto the CAN bus in control of the engine is going to be a concern.

I am not suggesting the vehicle goes from say 100kw to 20kw in an instant. I am suggesting after a visual an audible warning the power drops from say 100kw to 90kw the after maybe ten minutes again following warnings dross from 90kw to 80kw and so on. That is a very controlled change that is safe and manageable

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1408014 16-Oct-2015 18:28

MikeB4:

I am not suggesting the vehicle goes from say 100kw to 20kw in an instant. I am suggesting after a visual an audible warning the power drops from say 100kw to 90kw the after maybe ten minutes again following warnings dross from 90kw to 80kw and so on. That is a very controlled change that is safe and manageable

Dropping power while driving at 100km/hr on the motorway is not safe or manageable. It unnecessarily creates hazards for other road users, as well as the driver of a vehicle who is familiar with the specific power level of their vehicle, and is going to be essentially driving an unfamiliar vehicle.

You again fail entirely to answer half the concern, and inadequately answer the other.

The idea is, once again, dangerous and silly.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1408018 16-Oct-2015 18:36

Kyanar:
MikeB4:

I am not suggesting the vehicle goes from say 100kw to 20kw in an instant. I am suggesting after a visual an audible warning the power drops from say 100kw to 90kw the after maybe ten minutes again following warnings dross from 90kw to 80kw and so on. That is a very controlled change that is safe and manageable

Dropping power while driving at 100km/hr on the motorway is not safe or manageable. It unnecessarily creates hazards for other road users, as well as the driver of a vehicle who is familiar with the specific power level of their vehicle, and is going to be essentially driving an unfamiliar vehicle.

You again fail entirely to answer half the concern, and inadequately answer the other.

The idea is, once again, dangerous and silly.

Why is a 10% power reduction so dangerous ? The vehicle will maintain speed and the driver has been warned prior. You can have greater effect by a headwind on the Wellington urban motorway.
You seem to have the notion that when the power drops 10% the vehicle will suddenly stop or reduce speed rapidly it won't. The 10% Wil feel like a headwind or going up a small gradient.

Footnote; my posts have been polite I don't understand why your tone is aggressive and condesending. So I shall refrain from responding to you.

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15