Lane-splitting submission

Is it really kosher to make a submission which draws references to
another submission... I mean... if Ellis, T has already made these
points in his submission, haven't those points already been made.
Shouldn't you really be drawing data from external references?

And also, if you're going to refer to another submission, you should
post a valid url link to that submission. I don't think Tony Ellis is
in any way associated with the Moral Re-Armament group.

Nev..

 

The current road toll in WA is < 180 bodies per annum. In 1965 the road toll
was >360 (and no, it wasn't an abberation, that was the going rate for WA
for most of the sixties). With at least a doubling of the population since
then, I see that as a 75% reduction. I'd be interested to know the change in
the number of accidents and less terminal injuries.

Theo

 

If you look Ellis's is into the Victorian traffic inquiry not the Federal
one. But the joy of academia is referencing. The ultimate goal is to have
a series of papers that all refer to each other

Brett

 

Just looked at that link oops, missed out an 'a' www.mraa.org.au. Must have
been tired, wrote it on night shift. But really, there are very few
references available. If everyone who submitted had to find original
references, GovCo could expect to receive about six submissions at the most.
Most of the references I used directly were also referred to in Tony Ellis's
excellent paper, which was wider ranging than just this subject. I quoted
him for the hard copy references I couldn't get.

Brett

 

Depends on your definition of the word toll doesn't it - I think you'll
find that the combined number of incidents - crashes, injuries either
serious or not and deaths combined will steadily increase with road
use. Its just that the combined incidents aren't mesured, just the
serious injuries and deaths. Trying not looking at it in a 'simplistic'
way - would you believe that the combined toll (motor vehicle
incidents) will be higer, lower or the same 20 yrs from now?

 

~
[blank look]
Yes of course!
Riding a motorcycle is many times more difficult than just driving a car
(and permit/licence testing/qualification in almost all states reflects
this) so of course the average motorcyclist is waaaaay more skilled (and
thus less "silly") than the average car-driver.
Why would you think not?

 

Hmmm... well I now think that the BMWs are superior, yes.
I'm under no such misaprehensions about my own superiorosity though!

 

~
EH?!!?
You don't own A bike? Not even one?!!?
Faaark!

 

*Phew* I'm back in the group as of about 2 hrs ago...

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

I didn't say BMWs or the people on them were more superior.

Theo

 

Mr. H,
They probably did shit on the Harleys... but how would one
tell?

Johno

Coopers mate?

 

No..No Pete, not yours mate! - beer?


Johno

 

[applause]
I was gonna' say "bloody Harleys; ...wouldn't shit on 'em!"

 

What happened to the ZX-12? Please don't tell us that it went the way of
the '02 CBR1100XX.....

 

It went that-a-way... ---->>>>

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX

 

I hope it said hello to my R1100GS on the way through.......

 

We are talking a very low standard.. (Car drivers)
If you can see you make that cut
Being a motorcyclist and alive you must be superior (to this standard)
Just cos the rest of us are 'more 'superior

 

Nev.. said....

I s'pose that's better than it going this-a-way... <<<<----

 

I was just about to say you better watch where I'm shitting at the Supers!

 

In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:34:30 GMT

Up a tree, aiming at BMWs?

Zebee