Open mike 24/06/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, June 24th, 2024 - 27 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

27 comments on “Open mike 24/06/2024 ”

    • Graeme 1.1

      Oh well, another addition to the Bingo card….

      Simeon Brown (or other senior Nat) seriously injured in car crash caused by driver going too fast for situation / conditions.

      At current rate it's hardly a game of chance.

    • PsyclingLeft.Always 1.2

      The faster you go, the bigger the mess ?

      NActFirst are updating….

      The faster you go, the faster you get there.

      There being subjective…..

    • David 1.3

      Are we talking about roads that are unsafe, or are we talking about making the roads more safe?

      The two are different things.

      Improving the safety of an unsafe road should be a priority.

      However just making an already safe road, even more safe, for the sake of being extra safe, while looking good, doesn’t achieve anything or very as a result.

      • bwaghorn 1.3.1

        Did you read the article, or did you jump straight to dedend the idiot act/nat coalition?

        • David 1.3.1.1

          Yes I did read the article.

          The blanket reduction in speed will not achieve anything. It’s a knee jerk reaction, made under the guise of safety.

          In order to be really safe, we could require a man waving a red flag walking in front of vehicles..,

          Blanket ideas like this will just annoy the voters.

          It’s like having 4 mobile speed cameras, along transmission gully, on a fine sunny Sunday afternoon, to catch speeding drivers. Also known as revenue gathering.

          My experience with driving in urban areas, and residential streets, is that traffic speeds are often self governing

          • newsense 1.3.1.1.1

            You small dick, tough talking cunts (I know what a mixed image!) should piss off and send in some one tough like a Queenslander:

            When public safety is about safety not bullshit culture wars my link title to a post with a much more moderate lexis used throughout, but the conclusion is much the same

            • David 1.3.1.1.1.1

              @newsence; Hmm not to sure what the “you small dick, tough talking cunts” means? I generally don’t associate with people like that, so am at a bit of a loss, but I feel that I wouldn’t be missing much

              Sure we could reduce the speed limit of the residential street I live on to 30km/hr, along with the speed humps already in place. This may give the appearance of a safer road, but when the car crash rate is already at zero, or close to zero what’s the point? Personally I’m in favour of speed humps on residential streets, as they force drivers to slow down. Lowered speed limits will only work if they are enforced, and the only way to do that is to have speed cameras every 100m or so, or GPS tracking on every vehicle. This may be possible, but will the public support it?
              We live in a society where we are policed by consent, we are not a police state, we expect some give and take. The courts would most likely wave excessive fines, or multiple fines for the same offence anyway, just like they work to avoid the 3 strikes sentencing laws.

              I think the resources should to be allocated to the stretches of highway or roads where we have the most incidents, in these areas visible speed camera vans, along with increased traffic police patrols would be a very visible deterrent, which should lead to fewer road deaths and crashes. The downside is that we issue fewer speeding tickets, which is less revenue.
              When the speed cameras were first introduced, they were generally located on the high crash, or more hazardous locations. The intended purpose was to deter speeding, and reduce crashes and deaths. Since then they are now generally located in areas that have higher volumes of speeding vehicles, and we issue a lot of tickets. However these stretches of road are often far safer than the high crash areas.

              From what I see, we are policing the safer stretches of road or highway, and not the most dangerous stretches of highway. Personally I’d like to see more emphasis on the latter. Just like I'd like the police to arrest baby murders, and other violent criminals, rather than arrest people for tagging rainbow painted pedestrian crossings.

        • Drowsy M. Kram 1.3.1.2

          "Our vision is to close the gap with Australia by 2025." – PM John Key

          One more gap our CoC govt will fail to close, like the visionary honest John et al.

          List of countries by traffic-related death rate

          Australia: 4.5 deaths per 100,000 people; 4.9 deaths per billion vehicle-km

          Aotearoa: 7.8 deaths per 100,000 people; 7.2 deaths per billion vehicle-km

          • David 1.3.1.2.1

            New Zealanders are bad drivers, far worse than most countries I’ve been to and driven cars in.

            Drink driving is still an issue, texting while driving, failing to properly give way at intersections, stopping other drivers from changing lanes, running stop signs and red lights, not indicating, the list could go on… The speed is not the problem, it’s the way we drive. Someone driving at 30km/hr, not paying attention and hitting a pedestrian will cause carnage.

            Anyway, we reduce the speed limit, how are you going to enforce it? We can’t enforce all the rules that we as drivers ignore as it is.

            • Drowsy M. Kram 1.3.1.2.1.1

              The speed is not the problem…

              Sure, not "the problem", but vehicle speed is a risk factor.

              https://www.transport.govt.nz/statistics-and-insights/safety-annual-statistics/sheet/speed

              The faster a bad and/or unlucky driver is travelling, the greater the risk. Many Kiwis would know of a 'wrong place, wrong time' crash victim.

              It's not rocket science – the faster you go, the bigger the mess. If one simply must travel over the speed limit, then please – not on a shared road.

              As for enforcement, speed cameras can educate – 3 strikes and you're out?smiley

            • bwaghorn 1.3.1.2.1.2

              I reckon your a speeder, proof is your comment about revenue gathering, but I bet you have an inflated belief in your ability.

              I'd almost bet you drive a Ford falcon or a BMW.

              • newsense

                From the article linked above:

                The oft-held tenet that traffic fines is revenue raising is strictly speaking true as money is collected. But this ignores the fact that the only way drivers are raising revenue is by them breaking the law. We don’t question punishments for behaviour that could injure or kill people except, apparently, when those behaviours are committed behind the wheel of a vehicle.

                • David

                  Well I guess you are right. The law is the law, it’s black and white.
                  Someone speeding at say 110km/hr on the transmission gully motorway, is just as guilty of breaking the law as someone else doing the exact same speed on the narrow and winding stretch of SH1 about 100km further north.

                  The risks/consequences of an accident on the transmission gully motorway are much, much less than the accident black spot further north.

                  But I’ve yet seen the same concentration of speed cameras and mobile traffic police on the accident black spot that I do on the transmission gully motorway.

              • David

                Sorry to disappoint you, I have never driven a BMW, and never willingly chosen to drive fords, holdens, commodores, or falcons.

                As for revenue gathering, see my comment about four mobile speed cameras along Transmission gully, on a perfect day for driving, on a very safe road.

                The speed cameras would be more effective on roads that have higher crash rates, where the crashes are much more serious.

                But if we are being black and white, sure speeding on a very safe highway, or speeding on an much less highway is against the law. But the chances of a serious crash with a serious outcome is more likely on the unsafe road.

  1. tWig 2

    Small-scale nuclear power, as being pushed by the Liberals in Oz, is unaffordable: Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan could cost as much as $600bn and supply just 3.7% of Australia’s energy by 2050.

    The same amount would fund a change to 100% renewables.

  2. PsyclingLeft.Always 3

    Fast-track more ‘balanced’ if it avoided local authorities: Winton

    https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/06/24/fast-track-more-balanced-if-it-avoided-local-authorities-winton/

    FYI its paywalled..but having previously seen stuff about Winton Land, I did a quick search…

    Property developer wants $138m from Kāinga Ora for alleged anti-competitive behaviour

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/494869/property-developer-wants-138m-from-kainga-ora-for-alleged-anti-competitive-behaviour

    And there was this

    National frontbencher backs big party donor in $138m case against housing agency

    https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/08/29/national-frontbencher-backs-big-party-donor-in-138m-case-against-housing-agency/

    Nothing to see here…..unless you look

    Oh, and I was maybe not surprised to see…..
    Steven Joyce

    https://www.winton.nz/about-winton/

  3. Ad 4

    88 years old and still robbing banks.

    It's better to burn out, than to fade away.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/88-year-old-montana-man-sentenced-prison-2-bank-robberies-rcna158501

  4. observer 5

    Luxon being a jerk at the post-Cab.

    Reti says (direct quote) "I apologise" (for the cancer shambles).

    Luxon immediately asked if he will apologise too.

    Answer: "What I would say to you …" bluster, bluster. Minister forced to apologise, but PM won't. Pathetic.

    • observer 5.1

      And there was much more in similar vein, the journos asking about broken promises and Luxon refusing to engage, just constantly repeating his self-praise. They were still asking when he walked away at the end.

      Does he really think this works? Does he believe that voters (including Nat voters) admire him more for refusing to say sorry, to acknowledge any fault?

      It's not even smart politics.

      • newsense 5.1.1

        Why did/does he want to be in politics?

        But it’s also refreshing to see that bullheaded conservative patriarchy that just dictates its will and throws its temper around gaslighting everyone. Luxon just gets to a point where Dad has decided now everyone shut up!

        There’s been plenty of charming salesmen for this section of society, so it’s at least honest to see how these men in powerful positions are. Here even with everyone watching.