What IS an acceptable road toll?

With all the talk of trying to reduce the road toll by implementing roadside drug tests, restrictions for P-Platers, more speed cameras, lower speed limits etc a mate of mine raised an interesting (and quite contriversial point)..... when will the road toll be at a level where realistically, its not going to get any lower?

I agree theres morons on the road. P-Platers in $100,000 SkyRines is a joke and theres obviously a lot of common sense things that can be implemented to reduce the moron-deaths on the roads, but is the government going to stop and think at some stage "well, shits going to happen. there is going to be accidents and people are going to die on the roads. thats life." and stop trying to implement all these laws to reduce the road toll? Theres also the issue of, no matter how many laws are in place, it doesn't mean people are going to abide by them.

According to a 2004 stats summary I just found, theres 10.8 deaths per 10,000 vehicles per year in Australia. Thats .1% of vehicles.

In comparison with other countries (list of 'highly motorised countries')

Worst - Portugal - 21.1 = .2%
Best - IceLand - 3.7 = .03%

ps. stats are from http://www.factbook.net/EGRF_Regional_analyses_HMCs.htm

Would be quite interested in doing a more in depth analysis of accident/fatality rates in other countries but then also looking into their respective road rules and see if there was any correlation between speed and accidents and fatalaties etc.

eg: found it interesting that in the US where highway speed limits peak out at about 55MPH from memory, " Highway crashes cause 94 percent of all transportation fatalities and 99 percent of all transportation injuries", but in Germany, where theres the Autobahn, yet it costs about $3000 AUD to get a licence, their fatality rate is 1.9 per 10,000 cars/year, coming in one place worse than Australia.

If anyone has access to some stats that may make a compilation of these facts easier t'would be appreciated.

Sorry for the ramble, but just interested if people had considrered the fact that we're never going to have a clean road toll, and at what level is it going to become a "we've done all we can"?

its an interesting question but i think it comes down to more human nature though how do you make people drive safer

mmm. i think if anything it is our licencing that needs to be addressed. if we can get the people who cant drive off the road (and i seem to have seen more mothers in wagons and 4x4s who cant drive then i have P-platers) then the roads will be safer for everyone. if idiots didnyt drive we wouldnt need idiot rules to keep them alive on the road.

our licensing system does need an overhaul there needs to be a class for most 4 wheel drives between passenger cars and light trucks. but to quote jeff foxworthy "stupid people should wear a sign that way you would know they were stupid and wouldnt trust them" but i think thats just another form of segregation

good logic, when is the limit reached. as baybus said, if the rules are designed to protect the average person, if we lift the average persons standard the rules can be changed. I really think that there is no reason to put in place so many rules and reg. ppl understand that driving is dangerous, its also dangerous jsut to step out of the door each morning. the only time i don;t like that theory is when somebody who may have been doing something rite is taken out by a drunk driver, but then again accidents do happen, and you know it may happen when you go driving.

Another this is that ppl are being less responsible for themselves. eg the number of ppl in coursts trying to get money, eg if i fell of a swing at school, well i was stupid enough to fall off, but now ppl take this as the school was not doings its job to protect ppl, its the same with driving, its shouldn't be up to mr police man or the laws to protect yourself, ppl should help protect themselves.

jsut my 5c worth!

Reailty is as few as humanly possible but at some stage we have all lost sight of relaity at some stage and done stupid things.. Those of us who survived are lucky and those who didn't well they got planting or BBQ.
It's the innocent ones though that we all feel for because of the brainless acts of others - You are not Immortal :jesus

Agreed,

but when you look at the number of idiots that are driving unlicenced because they have lost theirs due to: DUI, speeding etc. Is it too hard to try and police that side. Should they make owning a car harder? maybe not more expensive, but just a lot more obvious if you are rego'd or maybe a tag showing your licence in some way?

On the 4wd front, I def agree. Some members of my family can be included in the offenders. They live in a city, don't go bush. Why have a 4WD? safety? of who? This is one area that I think should be hit to reduce the numbers of them around where it is just a status symbol. (particulalry after someone in a BMW 4WD just about ran over me the other night when she couldn't be bothered to look left before turning left from teh right hand lane!!)

Someone (I can't remember where or when) said a long time ago that traffic accident damage would be reduced if all cars had bumpers at the same height. Wonder why car manufacturers weren't forced to adopt this?

the other thing we can do take the freight off the road and back on the trains. that would help with the rougue truckies

Maybe, but in my driving around this way its regularly the cars that can't drive around trucks. Its almost like the people are afraid and so cringe away and almost hit each other. These are some of the people that I think need either retraining or not be on the road.
Reducing trucks for some areas would be good, but for some palces just not workable, but then you would have smaller truck legs due to rail use, so I guess it would help the overall situation.

mmm the 4wd drive matter. 4wd drives should be allowed on all roads, but ppl should be trained to drive them properly. eg have a lisence for a ll vehicles over 1.5t up to a truck lisence (this would also include falcons etc?) if you going to start banning 4wds? does that include subaru foresters? they have offroad ability? and have 4wd? where do you draw the line? what about the new dual cab holden utes, they are big heavy vehicles?


mabye have a lisence similar to motor cycles.

car up to 1.5t, then 1.5t to light trucks. And to get to next level, include testing or training on skid pans etc?

The best method for reducing the carnage on public roads is regular visible police patrols. No fixed camera or random check slows people and makes them think more than knowing that on almost every trip you take you will see at least one cop driving around.

Of course this will never happen as that would cost money where as random checks, cameras, radars hidden behind bushes etc make money. And shit loads of it!

Of course when the cost of insurance claims and increasing premiums, health care and rehabilitation, administrative costs for fines and imprisonment and all the other costs of accidents are added up the incoming funds compared to the outgoings for the proven effectiveness of regular visible patrolling is a false economy. Bring on patrols and bring down the carnage.


(it's a sad world when an anarchist can see the benefit of lots of cops on the road and government think tanks cannot)

[Edited on 23-12-2004 by HotRodMatt]

I will have to see if i can find a very good discussion on the froggy forum. Its quite good over there, they seem to be able to have logical, adult debates over topics, which don't have some of the mud slinging matches or the small band imature ppl here.

BiX wrote:mmm the 4wd drive matter. 4wd drives should be allowed on all roads, but ppl should be trained to drive them properly. eg have a lisence for a ll vehicles over 1.5t up to a truck lisence (this would also include falcons etc?) if you going to start banning 4wds? does that include subaru foresters? they have offroad ability? and have 4wd? where do you draw the line? what about the new dual cab holden utes, they are big heavy vehicles?


mabye have a lisence similar to motor cycles.

car up to 1.5t, then 1.5t to light trucks. And to get to next level, include testing or training on skid pans etc?

thats what i was getting at bix not banning them they should have their own class of licence.

i think it should inlcude all vehicles over a certain size, inlcuding large sedans.

Ahhh , ..... speed cameras , ...... my pet hate!

At Kempsey (on the mid north coast) in the 4-laned, 60km/h zone there used to be a speed camera car there about 3 times a fortnight, and nearly every day during holidays.

I really got the shits with this cause from memory I could never remember a bad accident along this section, let alone a fatality. So contacted the RTA in Grafton and got the accident stats for the previous 5 years from Fredrickton to sth Kempsey.

The stats revealed some ineresting points
*total accidents = 164

*fatal accidents = 6

*injury accidents = 58

*non-injury accidents = 100

*90% of accidents causing injury occur at or below the posted speed limit

*66% of fatal accidents occur at or below the posted speed limit

*the highest speed accident didn’t result in a fatality (141km/h in 100km/h zone)

*highest speed differential accident didn’t result in a fatality (120km/h in 60km/h zone)

*only 10 accidents out of 64 accidents (injury or fatality) had speed recorded as a factor (Police reported)

*2 of the 10 “speed related” accidents occurred with the “key unit” travelling at between 10 and 20km/h BELOW the speed limit

*and last but not least, only 2 of the fatal accidents involved vehicles travelling ABOVE the speed limit (1.2% of all accidents resulted in fatality with the vehicle travelling above the speed limit).

So I sent letters to the local Highway Patrol who passed the buck on to the Traffic Branch.

Since then the speed limit in the section where the camera car used to always sit, and go flash, flash, flash, has been raised to 70, and the sections of 60km/h zones with 90 degree bends has been reduced to 50.

In the letters from the police they said that they like to use the camera car due to high visibility, and actually wrote in the letter that they condone drivers warning other drivers by flashing their headlights!

That's my rant.
:party

that makes sense cause how would you apply it otherwise

Too many issues in one thread really.

If your legal then you should have no worries. Licensed , insured , not high or drunk etc. If Mr Policeman does pull you over , so what!

As for drivers on P's in fast cars , well thats just dumb!

4 wheel drives need a different license . Spend an arvo in Vauclause/ Double Bay and you'll see what i mean.

If there's anything i've missed my answer is just shoot um , shoot the buggers , the lot of um!!

Dan

😉😀:P

and let god sort um out hey danny

yep, 4wd licencing is a big grey area. one way to do it is ride height. yep, a falcon may weigh the same as a forrester, but with the big difference in ride height - especially if the forrester has a bit of a suspension lift and bigger wheels - surely the forrester is more likely to roll over.
It is especially scary when a soccer mum gets out of the lancer into a landcruiser and thinks that they will corner at the same speed. our suspension lifted, body liftes, lungle trekker tyred patrol has bloody awful corner behaviour. especially when the corner tightens half way round...

ive see those corners down there and some of them scare me in a bug

Interesting,
a similar thread is on the mtor sports board at work (yes, barls, I am still here!!) This one is about unmarked cars etc:

QUOTE [ "Believe it or not, but the idea behind unmarked cars is not to catch you out. Unmarked cars are meant to be deterrent from doing something stupid.
The concept, whether you agree with it or not, is that if you know that any car on the road could be a cop you're more likely to drive within the rules, whereas a marked patrol car will see people only behaving when there is an obvious presence. If you know only marked cars are patrolling and there isn't a marked car to be seen, then certain people could take this as the cue to drive like an idiot 'cause no one is around to catch them.
Maybe a lot more unmarked cars on the road would make a difference. Would people drive differently if every second day or so you saw a car pulled over with an unmarked car behind, blue light on the roof and you knew there were unmarked cars around on a regular basis?
If you truly thought that each and every car had a chance of being an unmarked cop car, would you be more likely to drive within the limits than only believing you had a chance of being caught if a marked car is around?
Whether unmarked cars are actually being used this way and are patrolling the roads and freeways regularly is another story, but the concept of unmarked cars acting as a deterrent to stop speeding and stupid driving, rather than being sneaky and waiting to catch you to raise revenue remains."]UNQUOTE

I agree that more uniformed police would be a good thing.
BUT, The cost of just putting more uniforms on the streets to my mind is horrendous. It takes a fair bit of time to get someone to a point where they can work, regardless of industry, and to get that many new cops would be along time. Then there is the cost of putting them on the streets, their cars, medicals, super, uniforms, ongoing training, administration, facilities. The additional costs for enforcing the fines, actioning every other duty that police do, such as break ins, shootings, assaults, lost children etc.
I am not sure that our society can currently afford the level of service that we seem to believe that we deserve/want. If people want better schools - it costs $, better roads - they cost $ as well, better hospitals - $ etc etc. So a determination has to be made to 'risk manage' (wan*word!!) and it seems that numbers of uniformed police is one of those things that is 'managed'.
Could this be why there are so many rules and regs nowadays where in the past a cop used to just pull you over, give you a verbal boot in the bum, then you went on your way? If one form of control can't be provided, then the use of another form is required. In this case, can't afford uniromed police = increased rules and regs and speed camera etc.

Thoughts?

i wasnt going to say anything mate but its good that someone is there to defend the country

Pppffftttt:P

'yeah its clear to land, come on in, want the jeys for it all??? just don't scratch my car when you unload the tanks and stuff and drive out of the airfield ..... the city, why its that way, big place, can't possibly miss it....' 😀

that would be me as well mate so your not alone

Yes, I agree that to drive a 4Wd that weighs over a certain weight 1.7 tonnes ?? [wild guess] You need to have a special licence and driver test [in the car]...
and that the bumper height be raised... or should say standardised ... but then most cars nowadays don't have bumpers... ??

The RTA in NSW has the answer for everything.....

Lower the speed limit... where : Every bloody where...
How Low... How low can they go??
they will be all happy when We are limited to 50kmH...
and there are No fatal accidents... anywhere....
then how will they raise the revenue to bui;d new roads and keep the current ones under repair....

The NSW Police are loving every minute of it... $$$$$$$
as You leave Scone to go South [at 50kmh] Once outside the town limits where the 100kmh sign was and the overtaking lane still is, there is a 60khm sign.... You have to wait for a couple of kms to get to the 100kmH sign.... so many locals have been fined doing 100kmH where they have been doing it for all their life.
Only Now its 60 Kmh... so You are doing around 40 kmH over the speed limit... Now these aren't speed crazed demons, just ordinary country people going about their business...
If You happen to have an accident at 60kmH and run off the road, apart from a wire fence there is nothing to run into....
well, maybe the odd cow or Kangaroo....

Making Us drive at ridiculous speeds is plain stupid....
I'm sure in the USA & other countries , every time there is an accident they don't lower the speed limit....

Most goods will end up on the Rail in NSW as the speed limits are going to slow the trucks down too much....
Maybe that is what they are doing... there should be different speeds for different vehicles..... Just because its dangerous for a heavily laden truck to go round a corner at 100kMH... Why Make everyone SLOW down to 80 KMH or whatever??? when a car can go round at 120 KMH....

Lee

yes unmarked cars work very well. For a while in around the brissy CBD, there were 2 Q cars, working. and must say everybody seemed to behave themselves. 1 Q car could do alot better than having 5 marked cars or 1 speed camera?

The problem with unmarked cars...
How many people see them???
on the side of a road in Brisbane or Sydney.. Yes OK...

But in the country... maybe everyone who sees the unmarked car is travelling OUT of the area or thru the area..
so no one knows about them...

My Son was booked by an unmarked police car recently, Yet I never knew it was in the area... [neither did My son]..
and probably no one else in the town knows of it...
We see plenty of Marked Highway Patrol cars and I think they are the way to go.....
but please keep the speed limits "realistic" ....

I read yesterday that there are 300,000 MORE cars on the road since 1998... and the ROAD TOLL Has NOT gone UP by the same amount percentage wise....

so leave the speed limits alone....

I love soapboxes...🙂🙂

Agree with the country roads bit as well Lee.
Have done lots of country driving (lived behind the olice station for a while too - In holbrook too, the buggers) and word only gets out that the hwy patrol is out, not unmarked cars. Nothing slows down cars on the Newell like a car with roofracks that look like a lighting bar 😀

Who was mentioning lowering speed limits? and with that 300000 more cars, is that rego based? or have they done sampling and multiplied it?

admittedly not all 4x4s are bad. i learnt to drive in a 96 Pajero. they have great clutch movement, enough body roll to teach u the limits of corners, and breaking ability that out-does our brand new Magna. that car taught me much better driving habits then the Auto Laser that i am driving at the moment has. i agree with Barls' dig at SOME truckies. i have recently been nearly squashed off teh road by a semi that decided it wanted to change lanes, far from being in a blind spot i was SITTING NEXT TO THE CAB when he decided to move! i have also been talking recently to another friend who had the same thing happen to him, and after tooting to remind the truckie of his presence was simply given the finger then run virtually off the road.

in all honesty though i think the best and safest drivers are the most passionate ones. i love the freedom of driving, and i love cars, which means that i feel my cars and i drive within their limits, this means greater safety and longer lasting cars. i think the people who are most dangerous on our roads are those who are not at all passionate about driving, and do not think enough about the act to consider doing it in a correct and safe manner

My mum bought a pajero cos she needed a 7-seater, didn't want a tarago due to lack of impact zone at the front and therefore had very few options.

Not justifying soccer mums by all means (hell, she probably is one!), but there are cases where a forbie might be one of the only realistic options.

They do drive me nuts though. 🙂

Nsw is about to start sending learners on advanced driving courses. That is a good start. They should make them pass/fail thingos. That way all the people who drive around with no idea will get filtered out early or smarten up.

As for truckies, I feel for them. It's impossible to actually cover costs and put food on the table without speeding and driving at the limit. As for trains, the big trucking companies have the state govt in their back pocket so rail will never reocver, and besides, rail freight is a logictical nightmare that beaurecrats can only make worse. As pained as I am to say it, and as much as I hate them, B-doubles and the like are here to stay.

Some of the suggestions sound a bit extreme. It'd be moving the car out of reach of more people, although admittendly they probably shouldn't be on the road anyway.

This is a warning. I'm English and I'm about to make comparisons between Austraia and the UK. I am not whinging. I like Australia. I've never really lived in England so not only do I probably have an idealised view of it, I'm writing based on the experiences of my parents and family who have lived there for long periods.

I can't believe that such dramatic changes are really necessary. If you look at the statistics for Australia compared to the statistics for the UK, two countries which are similar enough to compare, the UK has a significantly lower number of deaths per 10000 vehicles than Australia.

Both my parents learned to drive in the UK and my aunt is a driving instructor. From what I gather the big difference between here and there is that the test there is more difficult. My aunt was shocked to hear that I'd only done a Hazard Perception Test (Green P test) after a year of driving on red Ps. There apparantly it's part of the driving test. As is a more challenging written and practical test.

There are also small differences in road rules. For example, the RTA says overtaking is passing by moving into an adjacent lane, which could be the inside lane. In the UK, the right lane is for overtaking. This seems like a good idea to me, as the left lane on Australian roads is often slowed down by people entering or exiting, so why mix fast moving traffic with slow moving traffic. It might also help with people who like to weave in and out of traffic. Only trouble is people already ignore big signs saying "Keep left unless overtaking" so why would they listen to a rule printed in a book that they probably haven't even read?

Only trouble is people already ignore big signs saying "Keep left unless overtaking" so why would they listen to a rule printed in a book that they probably haven't even read?

Thats the other problem:

No matter how many laws are introduced, why would people listen to these ones over any existing ones which they break?

ie: the couple of turbo'd p-plater smashes in the last few months. IIRC, most if not all were also speeding at the time. The WRX in NorWest wasn't even a licenced driver. Tell them not to own a high powered car and they still may well break that law and then a few others as well. I know its a bit of a silly arguement cause people can then say, well, why bother having any laws, cause they get broken, but it is a point to consider. If the risk of getting caught for a broken law isn't high enough risk, theres a high number of people who will still break the law.

While I'm replying, I agree with the fact that something needs to be done about the 4WD's. Theres 0 chance that they will get banned for city only driving. There'd be manufacturers going absolutley ape sh!t and it just won't happen. As for getting a new licence class added into the system, chances are this isn't going to happen anytime soon either. What kind of areas are most well known for bad driving soccer mum 4WD's in Sydney at least? Mosman/Neutral Bay etc. Who's in power? What class of socioeconomic people are in this area and who do they vote for? It'd be political suicide to even think of suggesting this.

My thoughts on the issue are:

Recurring practical licence testing every 5 or less years.

P platers to have to do some level of advanced driving course. Get them on a skid pan so they know what its like to loose the back end of the car. Learning to drive is a joke. As everyone told me when I was getting taught, I was learning to pass the test, and after that I'd have to learn how to drive. I know having some form of more advanced knowledge of the unknown would have saved one of my cars when the back end stepped out in the wet and I over corrected. Common mistake. I know I SHOULDN'T have, but its kinda an automatic response.

More patrols on the road getting people for the 'smaller' things. With so much attention being placed on speeding and drink driving etc, I swear cops just don't care about the rest of the road rules anymore. Unless the rules have changed to allow the following:

- changing lanes in an intersection
- not indicating. ever.
- riding peoples asses way too close
- generally being an insecure underconfident driver
- pretty much any other driving rule that exists that a lot of drivers do every day

aaaaaaanyways

Enough ranting for me.

Its Chrismas tomorrow.
Hope everyone has a good safe holiday!

I think the answer to the post topic is very simple.

Any death that could have been avoided by not speeding, being sober, or not being to tired, should not happen. Of course there will always be deaths on the road, unforseen accidents that are part and parcell of the life we lead zooming around in boxes of metal, but where they could have easily been prevented and are the result of someone not doing the right thing, they shouldn't happen.

It's just Darwinism in process, these young dickheads dying in cars.

I survived my P's while owning some wicked V8's (not much turbo crap around then) and this was while doing some truly scary things in cars and fast bikes. I made it out alive and half the time I was not even sober.

Never damaged anything or hurt anybody and this was before we all the wonderfully successful traffic aids like cameras and silly slow speed limits.

The only sad part about all this is the innocents they take out along the way. If the drivers who cause these deadly prangs actually survive, they should be put down and the parents sent a bill for the bullet.

Kids dying in turbos? It's just nature cleaning out the gene pool again.....:rudolf

The question is how do we educate young drivers from being killed.?There are many answers and questions but which is the right one.I think the new Pplate and L learner is not doing all stopping the carnage.Driving a 4 wheel drive is not stopping carnage and the trucks of the road is the not the answer iva.I would think young drivers rely on ther brakes in ther car as saving ther lives.The question i use when disscusing this topic with any one is,If you were travelling down a street doing a 100 in a 80 zone and all of a sudden a kid runs out in front of you about 50metres away what is the reaction do we have?This is a question especially needs to be asked to young drivers and any poor driver.You all would be thinging what the answer would be.Before these young driver hit the streets in slow allfast cars this where it start before killing ourselves.It would be good to see some answers to this question.JVLRacing(i have 3 kids)

I did one of them defensive driving courses at murcott's this month (christmas present) and I have to say they are very good. I reckon the real problem on the roads are the over-confident drivers who have to get there 2 minutes quicker and risk OTHER peoples' lives. I really couldnt give two shits if someone wants to speed and crash into a tree, good on them. But the only problem is the drivers who have to get where they want to go 5 minutes quicker by driving like they are mark skaife or something and kill other, innocent people. But yes, driving courses for all p-platers (I am one) I fully support. But I think it should be teaching people how to stop accidents, ie. driving at the right speed for the conditions, not driving like an idiot to show off to your mates, not tailgating, giving yourself enough space to avoid accidents etc etc etc rather than teaching them how to control a skid.... if you're a good driver you shouldn't have to control skids 🙂

well that's my rant :P

you're a twit Sax
"I survived my P's while owning some wicked V8's (not much turbo crap around then) and this was while doing some truly scary things in cars and fast bikes. I made it out alive and half the time I was not even sober. "

"If the drivers who cause these deadly prangs actually survive, they should be put down and the parents sent a bill for the bullet."

hypocrite idiot. You were one of the lucky ones that made it through without actually connecting anything.

A good freinds best mate died this week. Yes driving stupidly, no more than you did when you were young or myself. The bloke who killed him, the driver, was a good kid. Did something stupid like most young blokes, and was unlucky enough for it to actualy eventuate in someones death.

You want to go to down the road to this young blokes parents house and tell them that their son should be put down and they need to pay for the bullet? Mabye at the wake after the funeral you can tell them good time yarns about your wreckles drunken driving in your tough v8 when you were young and have a good laugh about how you were lucky enough not to collect anyone and get put down yourself.

Your comments about clearing out the gene pool are very Inapropriate. Especialy when some people have had deaths on the road this time of year.

need i remind you "and half the time I was not even sober." Hypocritical fuck.

I'm in tears here you heartless cunt.

Hugs for Dave_Bugz.

We all have different opinions. Yeah?

The best we can do is educate our children and be the most courteous driver we can at all times. Just be safe, appropriate and cruise. Like sex really 🙂

Been on a track, had thrills, and it is definitley the place for it, not the public roads.

Well zero road toll would be acceptable but unrealistic....there are so many unpredictables out there still even if everyone obeyed the road rules...poor visibility...unfamiliar roads.....speeds and conditions a driver may not used to

That fatality on the Peninsular was a very sad one...but driver on L's not licenced to be driving unsupervised...and they'd been out to a party...taking friends home....Unfortunately this seems to happen every year...it's not a first time

Research does show that young guys 18 -25 do have more accidents and more likely to kill themselves driving...they are higher risk takers...There is the driver education but I don't think it ever alters the risk taking in a lot of cases unless they have a mate wiped out and they rethink what they do on the road

This is a time of year when people who don't normally drive much pile the family into a car and take off on a holiday...the Sunday driver thing for an extended period...they tend to frustrate the more aggresive drivers and then risks are taken....goodness I held my breath the other day when there was nearly a head on with an overtaker taking massive risk nearly didn't get in...so close....I was only glad I was well back from it FARK

a senior copper recently said (something like) "nowadays, most crashes aren't caused by excessive speed, alcohol, fatigue etc. They think 'i've got my seat belt on, im doing the speed limit, im alcohol free and im stopping in two hours, so i won't crash..."
is this the result of the government bleating the same tune day in day out, propaganda like?
he went on to say "how to you prove the cause of crashes these days? it's hard to say whether they were passing a drink to the kids, turning up the radio or admiring the scenery..."
it is complacency. it's the same thing as 'it won't happen to me. but how do you put the excitement back into driving? 110km/h in any falcodore has the motor at 1500-2000 rpm, barely taxing the chassis. yawn. with better roads and safer cars, shouldn't speed limits be going up, not down?

Helbus when you are a hypocrite you have no opinion as far as I'm concerned (Not you tho mate). Jenz you're right. Young blokes do go through that invincible stage. I did but fortunatly I took most of that out to the surf than on to road where I might hurt other people. I lost one of my best childhood freinds in another stupid carless car crash a few years ago. Was also an L plater, driving silly just around the block from where this recent one happened. Since then his Dad has been working really hard to educate kids on the peninsula about driving. Just trying to get them to appreciate that it does actually happen. It's very frusterating that the message isn't getting through to all the kids. I guess we have come a long way since the later years with cracking down on drink driving and seatbelts etc. It's still not good enough tho is it? sad 🙁

Dave Bugz, get over it. I've lost two good mates in bike crashes in the space of a year. The first was playing russian roulette by speeding heavily. He crashed at christmas time and left behind a wife and 3 kids. He wasnt drunk or stoned and he was on a road he had ridden dozens of times while in the company of more mates on bikes. He was a good rider with heaps of incident free riding as a bike courier in Sydney.

A bloody dangerous job which we both did and did well. Speed, rule breaking and racing were all part of our daily life while dodging cars who were hell bent on killing us both. We survived that and more while earning good money in all weather conditions.
Sobriety was evident 99% of the time so dont give me shit about that either. Sometimes not, but again it's about ability.

No, he died while showing off how fast a new 1000cc Yamaha could go. He died and it was all his fault. What a waste.

The feeling around the bike courier scene at the time was one of amazement and shock but when we found out what happened it changed to dissapointment at how a family man could be so stupid. At least he didnt take out anybody else was my thought and I was his mate. Nice huh? Yeah I'm a real cunt as you put it.

A good bloke, very experienced and he threw it all away by showing off. As the drink drive ad says, ' a bloody idiot' .

The second guy was not a family man and could also chuck a bike around. He died exactly a year later while on a memorial ride HE organised for the first bloke.
He warned all the parties on the ride to be wary of a certain corner down picton way and then promptly crashed and died on that exact corner.

Freaky huh?

I stand by my comments about the pricks who don't have the common sense to drive within their abilities and their skills behind the wheel of something powerful.
No amount of training will stop a teenager who thinks he is invincible. No amount of experience will save an adult who thinks the same.

If a car doesnt kill them, chances are something else will later on anyway. Like I said, Natural selection at work.
Maybe he won't become a truck driver and have an even bigger weapon at his disposal.
Remember, a car is a weapon in the wrong hands and that means stupid kids who don't respect the power.

We all get the same driver training, we all start out as a clean slate, but some of us dont have the skills to survive lifes dangers and that includes cars and bikes.

The truth is often painful so it's best to cover it all in bullshit and emotion.

What do You thing of having Your headlights on all the time??

I use My headlights when driving on the highway, which I normally use to get out of town & go to the next town etc..

When I see other road users with their Headlights ON, I think to Myself, there is a person who knows that they are on a [dangerous] road and are conscious of what they are doing... Most of the others are thinking of where they are going, where they have been, concentrating on the CD playing etc etc.....

I would really like to see all cars with their headlights on during the day and then I would know that the drivers are making an effort to drive safely.... well they made the effort to switch on their headlamps.... without be told by anyone..

Over the Festive season its More important than ever....

Show You are thinking about what you are doing by driving with Your headlamps on....

You can buy a buzzer to connect to the door switch for a few dollars if You think You may forget to turn them off....
If You are thinking of what You are doing You should remember that Your headlamps are on....

Lee -- headlamp user --

So the last few comments are pretty deep and ther is a few hero acts which does not make you a good rider all driver.So it comes back to the younger generation on education.Does this mean the question needs to be ask as i stated in my earlier comment.Boys lets not bag or insult each other we need to maybe educate younger forum members with our experience in how to do it right.JVLRacing

Some people cant be told or wont be told. Adult or kid it doesnt matter.
You cant teach them, they are invincible and that's it.

They might take on drugs and die, or they may try driving a car and die. The attitude is there and no amount of education will help them. TV ads try but they should make every new driver visit the morgue or make them see a video of the results of being so cocky.

Maybe they will give surfing a try and get eaten by a shark. So sad. (but they knew that sharks swim in the water)

Life is a risk, end of story.
But no, we cant educate against stupidity and we cant successfully legislate for it either.
People will die on the roads if they have the wrong attitude for their available skills, simple really.

Like that prick who killed 3 plus an unborn kid while showing off in dads stolen skyline. Dad said dont drive it, but he left the keys around and look what happened.

Would he leave a loaded .38 around as well?

Dont play with the gun Jonny, it's dangerous. A smart kid would heed the warning. I did.

As for the emotional tirade by Bugzwhatever, if I was responsible for killing someone in a car and it was my fault, I'd gladly pull the trigger on myself because i couldnt live with it, ever. Oh but no, we counsel them these days and tell them that its alright, that shit happens.

You want to cut the road toll, you make it as strict for a car licence as it is for a train.

Firstly, age.
You will be 21. Not 16 & a half.
That (supposedly) eliminates the imaturity problem.

2) What you can drive.
You will have a seperate tick on your name for every type of locomotive or self propelled passenger train that you are qualified to drive.
So you never drive something that you are not familiar with, or is beyond your capabilities.

3) Where you can drive.
Pretty much as above.
You don't drive anywhere you are unfamiliar with.

4) Alchohol.
The limit is zero.
If you blow between zero & .02, you will not drive that day, & there will be all hell to pay, but you'll keep your job.
Over .02, your finished. Never to drive again. No courts, no appeal.

5) Speeding.
Much the same.
The severity of the punishment depends on how much you are speeding by. BUT, THERE ARE NO TOLERANCES. You will get done for 2kph over the limit.

6) Red lights.
Failing to stop is a cardinal sin on a train.
There are no tolerances, no excuses accepted.

To try to put it into the light of a car driver. If you run a red light, your licence is cancelled on the spot & you will never get it back.
If you stop at a red light, but your front wheels are over the white line, your licence is suspended on the spot.
Someone else has to drive your car home.

You will then spend at least the next two weeks going over every road rule in the book, & will be psyco anylised to make sure you haven't lost the plot. If & when they decide your ready, you can drive again.
The 3rd time, your finished. Again, no court, no appeal.

How many cars do you think would be on the road if road rules were as strict??

Not bad thinking ther spook all do we goven cars like trucks are eg.When new trucks are brand new ther limited to do 105speed max so do we goven cars to do the same maybe limit them to 80 for all learner drivers and pdrivers.JVLRacing

You know this topic amuses me a litlle. Not the fact that people get killed on the roads but how you all look to blame something or someone else.
Yes it is true that younger drivers are in more accidents but they are also probably on teh roads more often.
Anyway when I was young I though myself to be a good driver and rider. I had V8 as my first car and an injected 1100 as my first bike. But my parents convinced me to do some defensive driver and rider courses. Now I learnt more on these courses then I ever did from driving on my own. They were excelent and I believe every one should have to pass these courses before they can continue with their licience.
Who cares if you are 17 or 70 if they can`t drive safely then get them of the road.
It is not the cars fault unless it is an unroadworthy condition so stop blaming the instrument and blame the killers themselves.

[Edited on 25-12-2004 by Andy42]

I'm not blaming anyone.
I'm saying if road rules & penalties were as hard & fast as rail, there'd be a lot fewer people on the road.

just as a side comment, i find it interesting that victoria, a state whose policies could be said as similar to the ones spook suggested (mainly in the way of speeding, not having 'distractions' hanging up on the mirror) have 7 fatalities over the christmas season at the time this was written. nt (no limits on h'way) and tas (fairly tolerant cops) have zero. what do you think?

i also reckon that if it becomes law that no speedo can read above 130, oz should go back to mph.

NT and Tassie have next to no population.

Everyone has good points, but, you can put as many rules as you want in place, everyone at one point or another speeds (by accident or not), speeds to overtake, changes lanes without indicating, answers their mobiles while driving, has to brake hard because they haven't noticed the slower or stopped car in front and nearly smashes into it, or didn't notice the pedestrian crossing, or the school 40 zone. Everyone makes mistakes, it's human nature, and anyone that says they don't is lying. How many people, THAT ARE NOT ON THEIR P's, have accidents, get speeding tickets, get done DUI, not to mention the ones that make it home. How can we as "ADULTS" expect P Platers, to do the right thing when the example that they are given by us tells them otherwise. The point I'm trying to make is that we should lead by example, do as I say and not as I do is costing Australia lives.
We can make the speed limit 40 every where, we can ban 4WD's (I don't know why, If you are dumb enough to walk in front of one then I think it's your problem, but on the point of 4WD's, As a boat owner needed one to adhere to the rules laid down by the RTA with regards to max towing weight and had one for years,hardly ever took it off road, exept for the beach, I also owned a kombi and before you start on the whole 4WD's are dangerous because they don't have crumple zones, look at the cars we drive. I drive a kombi and I know the crumple zone extends from the front to the back, If I have a serious accident I'm screwed essentially. That's the risk I take and because of that I leave a bigger gap between me and the car in front or keep an eye out for wandering on-coming traffic). I also knew they both weighed diferent amounts, handled diferently, accelerated about the same, and stopped diferently (the 4WD stopped quicker). How is a different licence going to help. Are we going to get to the point where we need different endorcements to drive a falcon or a commodore. They handle differently, we can't change that. It all comes down to common sence.
I'm not perfect and I don't expect anyone else to be, If we put in place stupid speed limits or rediculous licencing requirements it's only going to effect the people trying to do the right thing. People are still going to make mistakes and idiots are going to be idiots. All I can say is look out for yourself. Some accidents are un-avoidable but most are.....

[Edited on 26-12-2004 by 57 Panel]

[Edited on 26-12-2004 by 57 Panel]

This is why racing on the street is so dangerous

http://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=258005&st=0