Even we were surprised...

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 05 Dec 2005 07:44:09 +1100

What is the problem?

The problem is a small group riding in an inappropriate manner.

So first job is to work out what is 'inappropriate'. "Over 60kmh" isn't
a good metric, something else is needed.

The next job is to work out how to identify that small group -
presumably that's done by looking at the behaviour: if they behave in
the way not wanted, them's the ones.

Lastly, have to halt the behaviour. You can do that either by
education, which hasn't really been tried in any coherent sensible way,
or by some form of punishment.

I think that both have to be tried, as it's clear there are some who
won't respond to education of any kind, but almost any form of
punishment is costly and not completely effective[1]

The best way to deal with the small number of real idiots is to get them
off the road. Yank their licences. If this is done so the majority are
clear that only the idiots are being targeted, I expect the bush
telegraph and other circumventions won't be used as much. If riders
figure that the cops are out to get everyone even if they aren't being
idiots, then they'll do their best to warn people.

Ideally, the cops should be working with councils and safety groups to
hammer the education into the majority of riders who can be educated.
And this should be coupled with things like sensible road signs warning
of hazards in a usable way, like "decreasing radius corner" signs and
"pushbikes are allowed to take the whole lane, if you can't cope then
hang up your leathers, you suck" signs...

Then they should be working with rider groups to identify idiot
behaviour. How can a cop perched on an embankment recognise an idiot in
its natural habitat and tell his mate "flouro leathers and red bike with
CF pipes coming your way, book him Danno"? Where the bookings for the
dangerous riding, not speed as such? (Even if that dangerous riding
might be speeding....)

Hit the idiot with enough "don't ride like that on public roads you
dickhead" charges that their licence disintegrates on exposure to the
magistrate. Publicise the fact that riders are losing their licences
for the behaviour that *riders* think is foolish.

Problem of course is that it's all more expensive and difficult than
speed cameras, even if the outcome - dickheads off road and road safer
for all without harming quality of life - is preferable.

Zebee


[1] punishment as a behavioural modification technique only works if the
consequence follows immediately and consistently, which is seldom if
ever true of speeding fines. Explains the high revenue from speed
cameras.

 

one of the hoons, you say?

Nev..

 

nah, Gerry's done one defensive riding course so he's now a guru.

I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html

 

The war on terror ???
WTF ???

PS...hiding behind a alias does not constitute owning up.

 

How about effective enforcement of the existing (or now, previous) speed
limit and/or noise regulations[1]?

Does anybody _really_ think its the riders doing 70 km/h who are causing
the problems? Or even the riders doing 80 or 90 km/h? (Remember that
some sections of this road used to have 100 km/h speed limits.)

No, I don't either.

Does anybody _really_ think the riders who are currently causing
problems by doing 100+km/h (which was already a 4 point and 3 month
suspension offense) are going to take any more notice of a 60 km/h limit
that they have been taking of the 70 km/h limit?

No, I don't either.

Does anybody _really_ think this speed limit change is a knee-jerk
political reaction by ignorant local government caving in to ill though
out local pressure, rubber-stamped by RTA road safety staff who appear
to have not spent the slightest effort thinking the issue through, in a
futile attempt to cover up a problem thats being allowed to continue due
to incompetent police enforcement of the existing limits?

You too, huh?

big

[1] although admittedly to enforce the noise regs, they'll first need to
actually write them properly, not just come up with some impractical and
unenforceable "regulations" that are so half-arsed they got laughed out
of parliament.

 

I've been sprung!

regards,
CrazyCam

 

So dragging out the inscrutable logic of RTA, what's next? Decrease to 50?
How about 40?

Why 60? Why not 50? It's not even a built-up area.


alx

disclaimer (I have not ridden up the OR for MONTHS)

I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html

 

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

No.

The problem is folk riding like total loonies, and some of them crashing
and either killing themselves or others.

If there weren't so many crashes and fatals, the authorities would be
bothered about it.

It is compounded by many of the saner riders apparently condoning
(encouraging?) this behaviour.

Well, if you still had the baby Bimmer, I'd suggest thee and me got
hired to ride up and down the Old Road, as much as we felt like, you on
the BM, me on the Z50. We get cameras mounted on the handlebars, and
anyone who passes either of us is riding inappropriately.

I have to say that those who totally disregard the speed limit are
"behaving in the way not wanted."

I think that you, and many others, are falling into the trap of
thinking, yeah, well, I can ride that road at 25 or 30 kph over the
speed limit, and nothing happens..... it's only the ones that are 100
kph over that are the real problem.

This is not true.

Nor, by the way, is the arguement that "it used to be 100 kph limit."

I asked John L., and I repeat the question of you, Zebee...."What speed
limit would you put on the OR from Mooney to the Slab?

As far as "education" goes, it could be done.

Same way we got from "everyone has a few beers and drives home" to the
current social attitude that two liquer chocalates turns you into a
ravening beast ready to kill at a moment's notice.

It takes a while, costs a bit, but <shrug> it could be done.

Trouble is, of course, that to utilise the resources required for this
kind of education, the powers that be would probably just decide to go
the whole hog and ban motorcycles.

As far as the punishment....dunno.

If you are trying to deal realistically with people who are quite happy
to just out run the cops, then I dunno what you can do with them.

They think, well, ain't I cool and a fast rider.....assuming it works.

The bit about pushbikes should be printed in the motorcycle and car
licences.......

Signage, like....the speed limit on this bit of road is..... doesn't
seem to get their attention, why do you think any other signage is
likely to help?

See Lemming Corner.....

"Might be speeding" .... come on Zebee.... you are falling into the
business that motorcycle riders are somehow exempt from obeying the
"normal" road laws?

The ones that are caught......not the ones who smear themselves onto
rocks/trees/on coming innocent bystanders/etc.

Problem is, take all the dickheads off the road, who does that leave?

Thee and me....and sometimes I worry about thee!

regards,
CrazyCam

 

Typo? yeah right.

 

Best get in quick before you have to do the Old Road in reverse gear....
difficult on most motorcycles. ;-)

regards,
CrazyCam

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 05 Dec 2005 16:18:35 +1100

So the problem isn't just bad behaviour of any kind, it's that it's
leading to crashes?

Does that change the solution any?

Whereas I don't.

If the problem is the fatals, then what information do you have that
people disobeying the limit is the sum of the problem?

I note that I have had 2 injury crashes on the OR and was under the
limit in each one.

It isn't? Well, see above - ones under the limit are also a problem.
So why focus on the limit? Is it the real problem or the only one?

I don't believe so.

I figure 70 or 80, with advisory signs, especially ones noting problem
corners. Giving information more useful than "crossed up bike".

Given research that shows most people in cars are quite capable of
driving at less than the limit in difficult terrain, 80 is probably
quite reasonable through there.

I'd not want to do more, because I think the speed limits are also a
warning to people about hazard level, and the OR has pushbikes and
tourists.

If it wasn't for that, I'd say a 100 limit was fine.


*if* the desire is to reduce crashes. If the desire isn't that, then
different measures should be used.

I have no proof of that, and neither do you...

Can't outrun radio. The problem is that to effectively get them off the
road will be expensive. It needs police willing to use the radio,
trained to spot the problem riders,, and willing to go to court with
appropriate charges.

And who are willing to aim for the 20% (or less) who are the problem
rather than all riders.

Do they? I don't know what they think. I doubt chases are sensible,
considering the NSW police chase record... but plenty of places to pull
them up, and there's always licence records.

I think the majority of riders need to be behind
the work, not opposing it. Meaning that the campaign has to have that as
a requirement, and that means behaviour and mindset changes from the
police too.

Because it's about giving useful information.

I'd say "see Reefer Madness". If you give information proven to be bad,
then any other info you give is suspect. See a speed limit sign that's
clearly not giving reliable information as to hazards (except legal
ones) and then it will be ignored. Same same the crossed up bike signs,
no useful info. a sign warning of decreasing radius gives usable
information that the rider needs and will take heed of. If it's used in
a spot that does have a decreasing radius!

The focus was on dangerous riding. Speeding isn't automatically
dangerous, so no need to confuse the two. It might be dangerous to do
5kmh more than the limit in that place it might not. It probably would
be to do 150kmh.

No point in confusing "breaking normal road laws" with "dangerous riding",
it just detracts from the problem, which is what causes crashes and how
to deal.

As it isn't possible to look at a rider who isn't right now smearing
themselves and say "that one will definitely smear themselves", all you
can do it grab the ones with the highest liklihood and remove them if
they don't drop their chances of smearing.

THe alternatives are to get rid of none except by smearing, or get rid of
all.

See above, I've crashed twice on the OR so it's all up to you!

Zebee

 

No, it's not, and I'm pretty sure you know Zebee (and JL) don't actually
think that either.

I (and I suspect they) don't think you need to be doing 100 _over_ to be
part of the problem, 100 km/h (30, or now 40 over) puts you pretty much
into the "problem group".

How fast do _you_ think is "a problem", Cam? How many accidents do you
think are caused by riders doing 70km/h? (bearing in mind the "innocent"
70km/h riders who get cleaned up by others cutting or running wide on
corners are _not_ "causing" the accidents.) How about riders doing 80?
or 90?

My gut feel suggests that single digit percentages of accidents on that
road are caused by riders traveling at under 100km/h.

How many accidents and (valid) resident complaints to you think there'd
be up there if the road was actually policed enough that people did the
typical "I'll keep it below 10km/h over the limit, 'cause you _always_
get away with that" sort of speeds that people (riders _and_ drivers) do
_everywhere_ else? Remember, 0-15 over is a 3 point offense these days,
4 of them in 3 years and you have to walk for 3 months...

Am I alone in thinking the actual problem here is a failure of the
police to enforce the existing laws?

Am I alone in thinking the new 60km/h speed limit will make little or no
difference to "the problem" while annoying and inconveniencing everybody
who _isn't_ part of the problem?

Will the new limit change my behaviour at all? Only very slightly. I
used to be happy enough to cruise that section at 80km/h - 10 over the
posted limit, but mostly well under the "safe limit" for my motorcycles
and skill level. Since the new speed limit and the revised 0-15 points
penalties mean that my old "personal limit" are still the same points,
the only deterrent is the ~$80 extra fine for a 15-30 ticket, so I'll
probably make a slight extra effort to keep it under 75km/h on the
straights...

big

 

I think you cut your NOSE off to spite your face.
Cutting your hand off would only spite your arm (and there doesn't seem to
be much call for arm-spiting!)

 

Are you talking about the new speed limit up the Old Rd, or every speed
limit on every road on this and every other inhabited planet in this and
every parallel universe, Big?

 

I think I might try an experiment...

....I'll post a thread with the subject line "Troll! Do Not Reply!" as
TheUnderBridgeTroll, and I'll have the body of the message contains
proclamations like "Bike riders are gay and take it up the arse with a
reacharound"...

....I wonder how many, if any, fewer bites I'll get than Gerry here.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:08:13 +1100

I'm shocked! shocked! that this should be so.

Zebee

 

Nope, the one's who are being dickheads are doing well more than 70 or
80, you gotta be some sort of special level of incompetent to get in
trouble on the old rd at 80 (or riding a bike with REALLY shitty handling)

AOL !(1)

<cheers>

JL
(1)Well I was getting sick of saying "me too"

 

I guess so, seeing as 60 won't work they'll need to take it down to 40,
'cos that'll work, fer sure !

JL

 

Umm Cam, you just said the exact same thing, except less politely.

Riding in an appropriate manner = being dickheads crashing and crashing
into other people, no ?

With all due respect, the Pacific highway between Newcastle and Port
Macquarie has a factor of 10 more crashes per annum, they haven't
reduced that to a 60 k zone. the action is not only useless it overblows
the actual crash rate.

The authorities are bothered by a couple of locals pissed off by the
actions of a few, the crash rate is an excuse not the cause

Oh puhleese, I've been up there maybe 3 times in 12 months, why, because
I don't particularly like hanging around dickheads, similar comments
have often been made at the cafe in my earshot - lambasting some tool
who thought he was better than he was. On what basis do you claim people
condone stupid behaviour ?

Mmmm, do you think perhaps that using 10hp bikes with rudimentary 50 yr
old suspension designs as the bench mark for appropriate speed is
perhaps a leeeetle undercooking the goose ?

Well there ya go, the guys doing a 140 in a 70 zone need the book thrown
at them- geez next bleeding obvious statement mate

Errm how about using the benchmarks the law already provided - more than
30 K over the limit instant loss of licence, more than 60 over potential
gaol time ?

Oh it doesn't really matter but 80 where it's currently 70 and keep the
80 will do if you desperately need a number, but as I keep saying it
really doesn't matter what the speed limit is, the guys doing treble the
existing speed limit really don't care whether it's a 60 or a 100,
they're still going to go through there at 160+ until something stops
them, how about utilising the existing quite sufficient laws to stop
them instead of doing stupid shit that won't change anything ? Geez I
feel like I'm talking about the terrorism laws again.

Errm the Lemming corner signs HAVE dropped the crash rate (not enough,
but has had some affect)

Naah Cam you're being too cynical, seriously there aren't that many
people acting like dickheads - in real numbers we're talking tens, not
hundreds or thousands, it doesn't take that much active policing to
manage the issue - which of course assumes there's anyone left in the
police force still capable of doing so (they don't exactly encourage the
good ones to stay in the highway patrol from what I understand)

JL

 

Yeah, everything he said, even the bits I snipped.

JL