| Fast drivers face fast licence loss | |
So, the government is pushing through more restrictive driving regulations to apparently try and reduce the road toll to 300 by 2010.
Good luck.
They are increasing demerit points. Banning radar detectors, and changing to a percentage scale for traffic violations (i.e. 20km/h over in a 50km zone is far more serious than in a 100km zone).
The last part I agree with.
But in my opinion it is a complete rort.
Where are the true statistics that say speeding contributes to a higher road toll? Back in the 70s we had a far higher toll, cars were slower and there were less of them.
Here are the initiatives they should introduce:
Drunk Driving
- 1st offence: Lose license for 12 months, $5,000-25,000 fine based on how much over the limit.
- 2nd offence: Lose license for 60 months, car is impounded and sold. $5,000-25,000 fine.
- 3rd offence: Permanent ban from driving. 6 - 60 months incarceration; home detention primary method.
All fines and proceeds of sale should be put into a trust fund to assist organizations like Odyssey House.
Infringements
Sorry, driving at 80km/h past a school is far more serious than a driver that has driven the same stretch of open road between work and home 1000s of times. Doesn't make sense to say they are the same offence.
Speed cameras need to be abolished. They are pointless revenue gathering devices.
All revenue should be put into a trust fund. That fund subsidises improved driver training, including a mandatory defensive driving course and refresher courses every 10 years for all drivers.
Vehicle Crashes
True data on the incident should be collected. e.g. Age of the vehicle, experience of the driver, condition of the road. Particular focus should be conditions of the tyres, brakes and most importantly shock absorbers.
Why the last one? Because shock absorbers should be replaced every 60,000 to 80,000 km. This should be mandatory as part of WoF. Shock absorbers are probably the biggest cause of minor incidents turning into disastrous one from an anecdotal perspective.
Statistics
As I have said in various forums before, the statistics model used by the LTSA and other government units are flawed.
A raw number is simply wrong, as is the use of deaths.
We have more vehicles on the road than the 70s, they drive far more that they did in the 70s. Our road toll is sitting around the 400 compared to 700-1000 in the 70s. The actual percentage of fatal incidents is tiny compared to the 70s. And guess what, our cars go much faster, the speed limit is 20km higher!
The statistics should be focused on the number of fatal incidents (not deaths), and be measured as a weighted value based on the number of km per annum driven by the NZ vehicle fleet.
This rant has been quite long, as I believe the government is not serious about reducing the road toll.
Four things affect the road toll:
- correct capture of statistics
- addressing lack of skill of drivers
- recidivist drunk drivers
- lack of focused vehicle safety
This is one subject I truly believe the public need to better understand, instead of taking at face value the flawed approach by government.
|
| Posted by Karl Rohde on December 22, 2007 at 12:00 am | Politics | Trackbacks (0) |
| Comments |
|
I could not agree more with your Drunk driving penalties.
The government perhaps should improve the public transport in NZ to encourage people to use the bus or train to get to work and back home like everyone else in the world.
Less cars on the road results in less car accidents, less car fumes being released in the atmosphere and also walking to the bus stop or train station is healthy. | | Posted by Cristian at 2008-01-01 17:07:28 |
| | Post A Comment: |
|
Topics
Links
|
