Road Toll Stats.

As of the end of September 2007, the NT road toll stands at 35, 5 more
than the same time last year. This is despite the introduction of
blanket speed limits on open roads at the start of the year.

As of the end of September 2007, the ACT road toll stands at 11, 4 more
than the same time last year. This is despite the introduction of fixed
speed cameras on major roads over the last 5 months.

I... I'm just so confused. What's going on??? Should the NT lower
their new speed limits, and should the ACT install more fixed speed
cameras? Surely that will fix it.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2007/pdf/mrf092007.pdf

 

Queensland is headed for an all time record, following a number of
recent crackdowns.

Yet another crackdown is expected to fix it. :-/

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/High-road-toll-sparks-crackdown/2007/09/22/1189881828873.html

Or.... http://tinyurl.com/2qjffs

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 12:06:51 +1100

I dunno I'd be willing to take any bets about that being just what
will be proposed.

When it's a complex problem with a solution that isn't "correct" then
lots of evidence can be ignored.

Like the famous "childhood obesity epidemic" where trial after trial has shown
that no matter what they eat or how much exercise (and they get more
exercise than many would have you believe) kids will be a range of
shapes and sizes. But when the trials are done the conclusion always
ends with "we should do more intervention and work because that can't
be right!"

With road trauma it's the same thing. Doesn't matter what the stats
say, "speed" is the answer. Probably because "harder to get a
licence" and "regular testing" are politically unsound. With emphasis
on speeding the average punter either thinks "I'm a good driver, I
travel at the limit so I'm safe" or else "I can dodge the enforcement
OK".

Zebee

 

The government should levy a special tax on fat people, that is that
is all that is needed. There are sound reasons for it. Some of them
being:
- Fat people use more fuel and so they contribute more to global
warming than normal humans.
- Fat people often use more State medical resources than normal
humans.
- Thin people subsidize the public transport fares of fat people.
- Thin people subsize the the airfares of fat people
- Fat people consume more food resources than normal humans

 

"Mr Atkinson and Ms Spence said they were particularly concerned by the
number of deaths on motorcycles.
Ms Spence said they accounted for four per cent of registered vehicles on
Queensland roads but 20 per cent of fatalities."

Probably no more accident prone, just increased probability of death.
There have been no fatalities from motorcycles backing over children
to my knowledge and one wonders what the pedestrian toll is from
motorcycles compared to 4 or more wheels. When they get concerned, they
should factor in the threat to others.

I also wonder what the death toll is from falls in and around the home
this year? Is it higher than deaths by firearms? Will they ban lighbulbs
and have a chair buy-back scheme?

Al
--
When schools of fish were studied, it was found that the leaders had
brain damage.
We, the public should therefore demand a similar study be carried out on
our leaders.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

 

Good point.

If there were no speed limits and no speed camera's you wouldn't take
your eyes off the road to see what speed you are doing.

 

That was the situation when I got my licence.

Theo

 

Governments will go anywhere they want. The worm can was opened long
ago.

It is not a good illustration.

One doesn't choose ones gender, it is assigned to them . On the other
hand obesity is a matter of individual choice.

Governments tax people who exceed the speed limit, why not tax people
who exceed a weight limit?

They only pay for the end product, not for the true cost of
production. Fat people consume more water and land resources to grow
their food.

There is a very sound argument for fat people being taxed.

 

The only way for the authorities to say speed was not the major factor
for any accident is if the vehicle was at a complete standstill at the
time.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 04:01:07 GMT

so do motorcyclists, are you sure you want to go there?

(Oddly enough two major hands on[1] studies involving thousands of
people over many years: the Women's Health Initiative and the Whitehall
Study, have shown that fat[2] people don't get sick more often than thin
people, but when they do their survival rate is higher, especially as
they get older. Bummer how that buggers up the prejudice isn't it.
Never mind, it is still OK to hate car drivers.)

Zebee

[1] meaning the researchers actually did the work, rather than grabbing a
whole pile of unrelated studies with unmatched groups and wildly differing
protocols and definitions, then running them through various statistical
sillinesses looking for something they could say was a correlation,
and then talking it up into a "risk factor" hoping that no one will
notice that's not a synonym for "cause". Journos of course prefer these
studies because they can use 'em to sell papers via prejudice and fear
which they know sell real well, almost as well as Princess Di and puppies.

[2] you can have fun deciding what "fat" is, as the definitions of
both "obese" and "diabetic" have changed. So if you see anyone saying
"epidemic" cos people are "heavier than 10 years ago" or "leap in number
of diabetics" it is because the definitions changed 10 years ago. In the
case of the WHI and WS, didn't matter what they did with definitions,
"fat" people still didn't get sicker[3] or die earlier. Unless already sick,
when they got better more quickly and died less often.

[3] in other words, no more likely to get cancer, or diabetes, or
heart attack, or pretty well anything the multi-million dollar obesity
industry tells you they will get. Fat or thin, your chances are the
same. Just don't be a skinny bastard who gets very sick, especially
if you are over 60.

 

Post of the week!!

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 05:54:20 GMT

Alas no. There's rather a lot of evidence to the contrary.

*some* people are very very fat and that is to some extent a personal
choice. Very few. Some of them are that way without choice. Many
are "obese" by current definition, healthy, fit, and will not be
changing shape cos that's how they are.

I can point you at a site with a lot of cites if you want to chase the
research.

Zebee

 

In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 17:21:46 +1100

And it would be hard to prove except possibly in the case of someone
with a dud knee who didn't play sport of any kind.

Zebee

 

<rand mode>
On droog testing tunnels and GovCo imbeciles at play.


Morons Inc - led by Spence and the StaySafeJerkoffs are busy plotting the
introduction of a shitload of fixed speed cameras to 'enforce' the Stupid
Arbitrary Speed Limits.
Beside the point, a little, they're also well and truly plotting ageist
legislation at the top end - since they're feeling quite chuffed about
getting away with the log-book kid-bashing without being lynched - but
that's for another day)
The *problem_delay* at the moment is the proximity of the FedElection to
the annual motorist-bashing/revenue-topping season - so it's all been a
little quiet - except for the announcement of the introduction of
'random' droog testing.
This involves testing for (IIRC) Hooch, Speed, MDMA and a couple of
others. It's been trialled in Victoria, and (****-knows why)the Deep
North, and now that the turds have managed to protect themselves from
having their arses sued with (probably utterly disgusting) legislation,
they're right to go.
Amazingly, they announcement included information to the effect that they
weren't gunning for THC(for obvious reasons) but for another mysterious
compound in hooch that lasts just a few hours. What is it? They wouldn't
say. Of course. Just another bit of suppressed information we all should
know about. Why? Because GovCo works for us - remember?
For instance, I'd like to know because it may be that it's in spearmint
Chewing-Gum, ferinstance, which I'd like to avoid if it's gonna cost me a
few hours and the risk of going along for assaulting police and
disturbing the peace - whatever that is.


And along with the announcement came a whole heap of blathering about the
random nature of the testing. Yes, at the very same time that research
from Victoria (guess which morons are involved) that, DUH, there was a
higher incidence of speed and ecstasy near (now they're called)
entertainment precincts. (We even have signs here to prove it - complete
with Stupid Arbitrary Speed Limits to ensure imbeciles who run over
drunks and other assorted victims of BigBusiness can be comforted by the
knowledge that they were doing under the SASL)
Naturally, it was mentioned that the 'random' testing would concentrate
on those areas. Fair dinkum, they're bloody geniuses.


So, they'll extract DNA from 'suspects' on the city fringes, while other
tired/drunk/inattentive/unskilled bastards go ahead and take themselves
out on country goat-tracks and two-way 'highways' all over the state.

And it gets better.
Remember that the droogs of interest in this case are *not* legal -
generally - although how the imbeciles plan to be able to tell the
difference between prescribed stuff and the illicit variety is anyone's
guess. Perhaps we'll see legislation for prescriptions to be tattooed on
foreheads before too long.
Wow, what a revenue boost this new testing regieme will be! The penalties
are ALREADY, like, at the get-go, about 4 times those for (the legal)
piss and variants. Needless to say, there'll be such a large incidence of
positive tests (natch, we'll be lied to about that with the real figures
as usual suppressed) that the fines will have to be increased. It'll go
something like "we never knew the extent.... blah blah" while all the
time the long suffering police have been dealing with literally hundreds
of off-their-face-on-droogs-thrill-seekers weekly for years, as well as
the pissed-off-their-face crew, of course, as their special bonus.

Anyhow, back to the cameras - the wiring loops etc are already in the
ground for the cameras, as well as the signalling gear. So it's only a
matter of time. A little time.

I'm starting to get the idea that a massive road blockage campaign by the
pro drivers might finally get these GovCo control-freak turds to sit up
and take notice that what they're doing does nothing but antagonize the
population. After all, saturation speed enforcement, road closures with
deliberate delays to favour TOLL collector arseholes, traffic calming to
fiddle used house values in 'chosen' areas ALL are highly discriminatory
- because all of it exposes those who eek out a living using the roads
for their work to far more trouble and expense than, say, commuters to
and from parliament house in their chauffeured POS's.

So, how? Completely blocking a different main road every work-day for six
months just for starters. Can't hurt to give it a try. Some roads won't
change much at all, of course - Ipswich Road springs to mind - which is
rooted every day even if no two imbeciles attempt to occupy the same
space at the same time. Of course it's the dreaded rebelliousness that'll
get the arseholes goat.
Since it's fucken well near impossible to move about in Brisbanes AM peak
anyway, why not sit there with the engine off for an hour or so without
the expectation that you're gonna have to move a few metres any time
soon? The prangs caused daily by imbeciles cause the same problem set,
which causes more than enough trouble already, and still GovCo does ****-
nothing about it all except set up TOLL roads for their pals. So, of
course it's not at all organized well enough for my liking. Yet.
On that matter, PointyHeadTool AKA the lord mayor has been mentioning
that Coronation Drive will experience delays and disruption during the
construction of the TOLL road known as the Hale Street Bridge. For which,
of course, he's deeply sorry He didn't mention the chaos at West End
and South Brisbane, but it WILL be there.
This, for a bunch or robbing mongrels who will collect a TOLL for usage
of the new road in perpetuity. Just like his disgusting tunnel, which
already involves inconvenience for all traffic. KSG is already wall to
wall trucks, many already carrying overburden from the tunnel, and they
haven't even fired up the the serious machinery. ****!
(I might mention that Brisbane has a perfectly reasonable under-used Big
Creek which the overburden could be transported along at minimal
inconvenience to the public - Both ends of the StupidTunnel are close as
dammit to the water - but nah, no chance there - that'd be too simple,
and there's be bugger-all tax revenue from the hundreds of trucks
involved in the current 'plan') BTW, this tunnel is yet another Joke -
because it basically serves a non-existent traffic stream. So of course
traffic will be 'forced' in some manner to use it. Duh.
These are the same imbeciles that that close off city street lanes/
parking/loading zones and all the rest for YEARS so their buddies can
build shite that'll generate money for... you guessed it. Now you'd
think that any reasonable council would gently suggest that it a building
can't be build without closing off lanes and sometimes whole streets then
it simply can't be built. No way.
DOUBLE ****!!

<end rant>
(as always a temporary status, though - don't tempt me.)

 

Yeah what he said, well most of it.

I reckon if we all voted the bastards out after each term.
After about 3 terms ( 9 or so years ) they might get the idea and get
serious about doing something
constructive re. road safety.

The opposition, whoever it was at the time, may run on a platform of
decommissioning speed cameras,
in school driver/rider training, regular subsidised re/advanced training.
sensible and variable speed limits on most roads,
not just those ones beside schools.

Oh gosh just think of the opportunities.

Capt. A. L.

 

These people are treading on shaky ground which I feel sure will be
challenged at some time. There is a difference between 'driving
stoned' and 'driving sober with metabolites'.

Unless the tests are calibrated to detect impairment then they are a
monstrous scam.

 

Bingo!
IIRC, the word for the detected concentration is 'any' - though that
could be typical GovCo 'scare' tactics

There was some discussion in the interviews I heard featuring something
called droog-arm (Can't help thinking short-arm for some reason) as to
whether the droogs in question were actually such as to impair driving.
It became interesting when it became apparent that bugger-all research
was mentioned in the SpinIntro for the legislation. Of course, there's
been MASSIVE testing of all manner of droogs by the military and other
assorted GovCo funded kooks - but little of the material produced has
managed to leak up to civvie street, by the looks of it. It *also* became
apparent that where was a vast difference between the effects of the
various droogs concerned. IIRS, it went something like hooch slowed
drivers - duh - and allegedly made them less likely to avoid a nasty
driving situation, to the other extreme, where Ice made for super-agro
drivers. Probably few of them are as bad in driving performance as a good
dose of the Flu (legal) while texting(legal), or even road-rage at fellow
imbeciles out there - which of course is illegal to do anything much
about.
I'm willing to bet good money that GovCo has been both openly (some
droogs/compounds) and (for other droogs) surreptitiously testing accident
victims for YEARS. Strangely, there's the matter of testing crash victims
who are anecdotally not necessarily the cause of the damm things anyway.
(BTW, remember the baby blood-sampling test scandal in Vic a few years
ago? On that one they were sprung red-handed, and they simply got a
little more careful since)

I'll also bet that the results of those tests proved nothing of interest.
Otherwise, GovCo would be literally shouting it from the roof-tops.


So, what the hells going on here?

Ferinstance amphetamines...
Good enough to 'increase' performance in battle?
Good enough to drive with the stuff on board.
Any critique of that should include some consideration of the matter of
whether GovCo's who feed the stuff to troops are concerned at all with
survival of their expensive and difficult to replace (human) resource.
War-comic fans be warned.

And as for the droog busts... We keep hearing about the massive market
for the stuff. And I'm sure it IS a massive market.
And we keep hearing about chefs or whatever they're called are busted,
that mad bikie gangs are the king-pins of the trade. But I reckon it's
bullshit. You only need to look at the 'announced' hauls from imports to
guess that this shite is pouring into this country and others at a rate
to dwarf what the tattooed brethren can manage to supply. It's a
business, a Big Illegal one at that. That kind of money can OWN GovCo.


And now I remember what I missed. Heroin. And cocaine. Well, now it
appears it's back on the go in Afghanistan in spades. The Spruiker said
the tests were soo sophisticated that they could distinguish between H
and other opiats. Riiight...
BTW, the ground was 'prepared' by the release of a report from the AFT
intelligence mob (is that an oxymoron - ask Haneef, I guess) about that
rubbish being in a situation of being on the up in the next few years.
How fortunate was that? No real evidence of that except to say that the
stuff might begin to be brought in via Africa, which we've already seen
busts for anyway. So it was *not* news at all. It was spade-work for the
locals to build on.

 

You're assuming they're thinking/planning further ahead than the next
free lunch and the next election campaign. The only time they ever seem
talk in terms of more than 1 term into the future is when they are
facing inevitable defeat.

Nev..

 

That's very interesting Zebee. I have always had the perception that most
older people (over 90) are skinny little buggers, like my dad. And I also
have the perception that when you get pictures in the papers of people who
have reached 100, or are the last survivors of the Light Brigade, or their
division in the Boer war, always look like they weigh less than 60 kg. Is
that just a perception and are most people over 100 years also over 100 kg?

Theo

Theo

 

Toby Ponsenby wrote:

Got to give Toby his due, he can put on a fair old rant.

regards,
CrazyCam