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 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 15

253 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 116

#1352405 27-Jul-2015 10:55

scuwp:
BTR: The highways in the US and Australia are generally wider and straighter than ours.

Most fatal/serious crashes in NZ happen of dry straight roads, in the middle of the afternoon, on fine sunny days. Go figure.

http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/roadcrashstatistics/motorvehiclecrashesinnewzealand/motor-vehicle-crashes-in-new-zealand-2013/

Only 10% of fatalities where a loss of control on a straight road. It looks like 50% of the fatalities occurred during a bright sunny day. 32% at night time. Driving in the afternoon does seem particularly dangerous looking at the stats.

It seems the only common factor is driving. So if we want a zero road toll the only solution is to make driving an offence. :-)

Try my latest project, a Cisco type 5 enable secret password cracker written in javascript!

Sidestep

1019 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 567

Lifetime subscriber

#1352424 27-Jul-2015 11:15

afe66: As someone who has one speeding ticket in 30 years of driving, these posts on GZ complaining about being "unfairly" ticketed for being just a little above limit get tiresome.

Drive under the speed limit.

(why don't we see the posts complaining about not able to be a little over the drink limit, that girl being a little under the age of consent, me paying little less tax than law says)

(Ducks)

Abrogation of personal responsibilty's a part of it.

A big difference between here and many other Western countries is the requirement to have personal liability insurance before you can register and drive a car on the road.

NZer's are covered by ACC, in effect sharing the social, physical and monetary costs incurred by very bad & recidivist drivers across to the afe66's of our roads.

In other places the threat of loosing your insurance cover's a far bigger deterrent than the fines dished out for speeding and other offenses.
Add up a few infringements, your insurance goes up. Actually cause a crash and it goes stratospheric.
Be 21 and male, it'll cost you more than if you're 35 and female. Why? Because 'statistically' you're more likely to drive dangerously, be in an accident.

Unfortunately it's also possible to end up in a situation where, after a few bad choices, you're uninsurable, and the whole mess of race and wealth raises it's head among insurance risk profiling.

I think that drivers in those countries I've driven in that require liability insurance are overall more law abiding & cautious (well except Australia maybe)

pdath

253 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 116

#1352427 27-Jul-2015 11:29

Sidestep:
afe66: As someone who has one speeding ticket in 30 years of driving, these posts on GZ complaining about being "unfairly" ticketed for being just a little above limit get tiresome.

Drive under the speed limit.

(why don't we see the posts complaining about not able to be a little over the drink limit, that girl being a little under the age of consent, me paying little less tax than law says)

(Ducks)

Abrogation of personal responsibilty's a part of it.

A big difference between here and many other Western countries is the requirement to have personal liability insurance before you can register and drive a car on the road.

NZer's are covered by ACC, in effect sharing the social, physical and monetary costs incurred by very bad & recidivist drivers across to the afe66's of our roads.

In other places the threat of loosing your insurance cover's a far bigger deterrent than the fines dished out for speeding and other offenses.
Add up a few infringements, your insurance goes up. Actually cause a crash and it goes stratospheric.
Be 21 and male, it'll cost you more than if you're 35 and female. Why? Because 'statistically' you're more likely to drive dangerously, be in an accident.

Unfortunately it's also possible to end up in a situation where, after a few bad choices, you're uninsurable, and the whole mess of race and wealth raises it's head among insurance risk profiling.

I think that drivers in those countries I've driven in that require liability insurance are overall more law abiding & cautious (well except Australia maybe)

I don't think you understand what ACC provides. Specifically, ACC pays for health care rising from injury. That's it. ACC does NOT provide liability cover. The ACC legislation removes the ability to sue for personal injury, but there is no point in this because of ACC.

I encourage you to read the Wood House report. NZ traditionally had what most other countries have now, and we abandoned it in favour of ACC, and what a huge improvement it is. You really need to read the Woodhouse report to understand the existing environment and why everyone desperately wanted it changed.

Back to liability. You ARE, repeat ARE liable for damage you cause in NZ. Around 95% of New Zealand'ers have liability insurance in their existing car insurance policies to protect themselves from civil claims. Maybe 5 years ago a study was done to investigate weather making this insurance a legal requirement would make any difference.
As it turns out, around 4.9% of those who don't have insurance can't get it. They have have had their licence suspended, have no licence, or convictions preventing them getting insurance. The majority of this group were already driving illegally, so adding another law say they could not drive without insurance would make 0% difference.

If was found that enacting new legislation would only have an impact on the remaining 0.1% of those driving, but the cost of putting in place this new system was quite high. It was deemed, rightly so, that all the remaining drivers should not have their registration fees hiked up for almost no impact.

In New Zealand your insurance premium is already linked to your driving history.

Try my latest project, a Cisco type 5 enable secret password cracker written in javascript!

nzkiwiman

2585 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 390

Subscriber

#1352430 27-Jul-2015 11:30

Not that I go out for long drives, but when I do I always count the number of police cars I see.
My last trip earlier this month (Dunedin - Timaru - Dunedin) I saw zero.

My last trip (Dunedin - Wanaka - Queenstown - Dunedin) I saw two

So no, I don't think we are over policed on the roads.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#1352443 27-Jul-2015 11:42

scuwp:
Most fatal/serious crashes in NZ happen of dry straight roads, in the middle of the afternoon, on fine sunny days. Go figure.

I'd like to see the stats to back that assertion.

My limited experience of seeing recent accidents has been that it is more likely at night, and typically near a bend or crest.

WyleECoyoteNZ

1055 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 372

#1352456 27-Jul-2015 12:02

I travel through the central plateau a couple of times a year, and in the Taihape – Taupo stretch, you’ll almost always see 2-3 police along that stretch of State Highway 1.

I did once hear that this stretch of highway is more heavily patrolled, because should the Mountain (I’m looking at you Ruapehu) erupt, then there are (police) cars in the area to sweep and close the road if need be.

As for more 4 lane US style highways in NZ.. just look at what’s happened in Tauranga with the opening of the new link road.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11482644

Give kiwi driver’s more open space and speed seems to increase. And anyhow, a 2 lane motorway\highway in both direction Auckland to Wellington will be boring to drive.

A better approach to road safety in my opinion, is to limit new drivers to a lower cc rating of car, similar to the conditions applied to learner motorbike riders…as a learner rider I think you’re limited to 125cc machines, still plenty quick, yes, but not a 1000cc monster.

Yet a learner driver can happily go out and buy a 400bhp+ turbocharged rocketship. And yes, some sort of compulsory insurance might help here too.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

jurgensp99

69 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 8

#1352520 27-Jul-2015 13:16

Interesting watch re speed limits and "safety"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BKdbxX1pDw&feature=share

Science is but organized ignorance.

jurgensp99

69 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 8

#1352526 27-Jul-2015 13:24

oh and here is all the data.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

NZ does really well when put in context.

Especially against say
New Zealand - 10.3
South Africa - 156.4
Sudan - 9370.2
Central African Republic - 13472.8

I grew up in South Africa where the media wouldn't even start mentioning the road death toll over the Easter weekend until it hit 1000.

Its all about what data gets extracted to prove your point.

Science is but organized ignorance.

Sidestep

1019 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 567

Lifetime subscriber

#1352590 27-Jul-2015 14:44

pdath:

I don't think you understand what ACC provides. Specifically, ACC pays for health care rising from injury. That's it. ACC does NOT provide liability cover. The ACC legislation removes the ability to sue for personal injury, but there is no point in this because of ACC.

I encourage you to read the Wood House report. NZ traditionally had what most other countries have now, and we abandoned it in favour of ACC, and what a huge improvement it is. You really need to read the Woodhouse report to understand the existing environment and why everyone desperately wanted it changed.

Back to liability. You ARE, repeat ARE liable for damage you cause in NZ. Around 95% of New Zealand'ers have liability insurance in their existing car insurance policies to protect themselves from civil claims. Maybe 5 years ago a study was done to investigate weather making this insurance a legal requirement would make any difference.
As it turns out, around 4.9% of those who don't have insurance can't get it. They have have had their licence suspended, have no licence, or convictions preventing them getting insurance. The majority of this group were already driving illegally, so adding another law say they could not drive without insurance would make 0% difference.

If was found that enacting new legislation would only have an impact on the remaining 0.1% of those driving, but the cost of putting in place this new system was quite high. It was deemed, rightly so, that all the remaining drivers should not have their registration fees hiked up for almost no impact.

In New Zealand your insurance premium is already linked to your driving history.

The primary aim of having the insurance I mentioned is against the extreme costs of health care arising from an injury you've caused, with property damage also included.
Here I carry insurance but could drive completely uninsured if I chose to. As many do.

The last place I lived the MINIMUM fine for driving uninsured was $2800, second offense a mandatory jail term. Draconian but effective.

I'll read Mr Woodhouse's report. I'd likely agree with the principles of community responsibility, the idea of fairly compensating all those who are injured. But embodied in it is ignoring the 'cause' of the injury and recognising the entitlement no matter what.
No factoring in of contributory negligence.

With automatic, no fault comprehensive cover, accident prevention devolves onto the police. Punish trangressions, with plenty of stick – and no carrot. There's no reward for years of safe risk free driving in the form of reduced premuims?
And you get people complaining about the police – giving out tickets, setting up speed traps, and an excess of road policing..

While insulating New Zealanders from the worst of the old system it's also removed some of the consequenses for those few who repeatededly break the rules, take risks, injure others..

I see things moving in the right direction with the newly introduced ACC “levy band assignment” ratings for regos.

Encouraging us to drive vehicles with systems designed to save lives & reduce injuries, and better able to avoid crashes in the first place must be good.
Not only does bad driving put you at risk, but driving complete deathtraps (like those little Japanese cab over vans) – because they're cheap to buy is false economy ..

Noted they specifically excluded “road design” speed, age, driver skill and alcohol use when coming up with the safety stats. Bet there were some interesting correlations there. Maybe in the next premium changes.

pdath

253 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 116

#1352615 27-Jul-2015 15:04

The primary aim of having the insurance I mentioned is against the extreme costs of health care arising from an injury you've caused, with property damage also included.
Here I carry insurance but could drive completely uninsured if I chose to. As many do.

But that's the point, pretty much every person in NZ who can get insurance has got it. We already determined that in the last safety review around 5 years ago.

The last place I lived the MINIMUM fine for driving uninsured was $2800, second offense a mandatory jail term. Draconian but effective.

You would have to agree that if every person who can get insurance already has it then it doesn't make any difference how big the fine is for not having insurance, because it wont be used.

I'll read Mr Woodhouse's report. I'd likely agree with the principles of community responsibility, the idea of fairly compensating all those who are injured. But embodied in it is ignoring the 'cause' of the injury and recognising the entitlement no matter what.
No factoring in of contributory negligence.

Woodhouse's view was more of practicality that community spirit. He found the net return to those insured was often less than half of the total pay outs, with the rest going to the legal profession. The commission of inquiry determined it would both be cheaper for the net population and at the same time increase the payouts by removing the existing insurance scheme and replacing it by ACC. They were right. After the implementation of ACC NZ was drastically changed for the better.

With automatic, no fault comprehensive cover, accident prevention devolves onto the police. Punish trangressions, with plenty of stick – and no carrot. There's no reward for years of safe risk free driving in the form of reduced premuims?
And you get people complaining about the police – giving out tickets, setting up speed traps, and an excess of road policing..

Once again, ACC only provides health care cover. You still have full civil liability for the damage you cause. You take personal responsibility for this. NZ has an extremely high rate of vehicle insurance, and as a result nearly all liability claims get settled by the insurance companies. Your insurance costs ARE linked to your accident history. If you loose your "no claim" bonus you premium WILL rise.

While insulating New Zealanders from the worst of the old system it's also removed some of the consequenses for those few who repeatededly break the rules, take risks, injure others..

Simply not true. NZ has a very high rate of insurance without requiring a big pointless stick. If anything countries like the UK and USA should examine how we have come to a much better alternative - one where you don't have to regulate the population into getting insurance - because nearly all NZ drivers do it voluntarily.

I see things moving in the right direction with the newly introduced ACC “levy band assignment” ratings for regos.

The verdict is out on this one. If someone can afford to drive a car that already has more safety features they probably will. Those that can't wont - and will have even less money to make the change. Do you really think people would choose to drive "less safe" cars if given the choice? Of course not. They do it because they have no choice. Trying to tax a problem out of existence seldom works.

Encouraging us to drive vehicles with systems designed to save lives & reduce injuries, and better able to avoid crashes in the first place must be good.
Not only does bad driving put you at risk, but driving complete deathtraps (like those little Japanese cab over vans) – because they're cheap to buy is false economy ..

Encouraging us to be able to figure out which vehicles are safer with programs such as rightcar.govt.nz is great.,
Lets be clear here, NZ already has very tough regulations on importing vehicles into the country. We don't allow "death traps". It's not like India or China.

Noted they specifically excluded “road design” speed, age, driver skill and alcohol use when coming up with the safety stats. Bet there were some interesting correlations there. Maybe in the next premium changes.

Did you even look at the actual link to the road accident report I posted? It gives most of the information you claim is excluded.

Try my latest project, a Cisco type 5 enable secret password cracker written in javascript!

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#1352710 27-Jul-2015 17:20

Sidestep:

I think that drivers in those countries I've driven in that require liability insurance are overall more law abiding & cautious (well except Australia maybe)

Probably because liability insurance isn't mandatory in Australia. Except CTP, which is closer in effect to ACC if it were opened to private competition whereby insurers compete based on price while still being required to spread the risk across the entire pool because they aren't allowed to charge a different amount to different people but still have to turn a profit so they ratchet up the price for everyone. Seriously, ACC is a far better system.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1352840 27-Jul-2015 19:38

afe66: As someone who has one speeding ticket in 30 years of driving, these posts on GZ complaining about being "unfairly" ticketed for being just a little above limit get tiresome.

No one has been complaining about being unfairly ticketed. I can can claim only one speeding ticket in 40 years of driving and that was over 30 years ago.

afe66: Drive under the speed limit.

Certainly by all means, but don't forget to pull over to allow those wishing to travel at the speed limit to get past you.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1352856 27-Jul-2015 19:57

trig42: I don't feel like the roads are over-policed.
If you are comparing with the US Interstates, and take only NZ motorways into account (maybe also the Waikato expressway bits that are finished too), I hardly ever see Police parked up there.

Well actually the stretch of road I was particularly thinking about was the Waikato Expressway when I wrote the original post. I drive this road quite a bit and it would be the exception not to see a police car parked up somewhere. It's not unusual to see two between Hamilton and Taupiri. With the completed sections of the Waikato Expressway among the better roads, mile for mile it has a far higher traffic policing presence than any other road I travel on.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1678

Lifetime subscriber

#1352930 27-Jul-2015 21:41

Technofreak:
afe66: As someone who has one speeding ticket in 30 years of driving, these posts on GZ complaining about being "unfairly" ticketed for being just a little above limit get tiresome.
No one has been complaining about being unfairly ticketed. I can can claim only one speeding ticket in 40 years of driving and that was over 30 years ago.

afe66: Drive under the speed limit.
Certainly by all means, but don't forget to pull over to allow those wishing to travel at the speed limit to get past you.

Oh I regularly allow other to overtake me, thoughs they are travelling faster than the speed limit which I'm travelling at.

I've been to a few crashes. The smell of petrol, burnt rubber, the car engine pinging as it cools. The distressed cries of injured passengers. One asking about the other one, the one you know is dead. Funny smell of blood. Getting chopper ready.

Puts things into perspective.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1352934 27-Jul-2015 21:58

jurgensp99: oh and here is all the data.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

NZ does really well when put in context.

Especially against say
New Zealand - 10.3
South Africa - 156.4
Sudan - 9370.2
Central African Republic - 13472.8

I grew up in South Africa where the media wouldn't even start mentioning the road death toll over the Easter weekend until it hit 1000.

Its all about what data gets extracted to prove your point.

One needs to compare like for like

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 15