Somebody shoot the bastard.

[S.]

Anyone else seen Bracksy's latest ridiculous anti-speeding proposal? They (the state gov't) want to limit all speedos to show a max of 130km/h, so that you're not tempted to try and hit the maximum speed shown on the speedo. They claim that initially there will be not actual restrictions on the engine/car's maximum speed, but that "at some stage, capacity (presumably actual speed capacity, not engine capacity) may need to be restricted". Ok, thanks for that YOU FUCKING WANKER.

Cars are safer than ever before, tyres are better, brakes are better, the road toll is at an all-time low, why the flying fuck is this moron REDUCING the speed limits and whatnot all over the place?! Does nobody else see the irony and unbelievable stupidity of this? For a couple of millennia now, humans have utilised transport to GET PLACES FASTER. Donkeys, chariots, trains, planes, bikes, and CARS. So once we've actually made the extremely useful step forward of creating faster, safer transport, we take the extra steps of restricting it extremely (eg the Hume Highway could easily and safely be driven at 200km/h end to end, were that legal). But no, instead of RAISING the speed limits to actually HELP people, we have a few do-gooders hell-bent on slowing us down as much as possible. To you do-gooders, I'd like to convey a hearty FUCK YOU.

Then there's the kicking the arses of anyone who dares stray over the line (accidentally or not) by 3km/h (no shit, that's the Victorian tolerance). Let's conveniently ignore the fact that this should be illegal in any circumstance, because speedo calibration has to be within +/- 10%, yet this tolerance is 3% at 100km/h - fair?

Even better is the hypocrisy of the government - Bracks gets chauffeured around in a Calais or Senator or Statesman or something (whatever it is, it's a big V8). Topping that is (the biggest turd on the planet) Peter Batchelor (transport minister), who got done speeding in a 50 zone (doing 58 I think) on the Richmond Boulevard. He was all through the media the next day saying "See, I'm not above the law, I pay the fines too when I break the law." Within the week, the speed limit where he got caught was increased to 60km/h (from the aforementioned 50 limit). Fucking hypocritical SOB.

Why do I feel like I'm being strangled? Oh yeah, I live in Victoria - Nanny State.

[Daver]

I can see the point- where can you legally go over 130... and when you are over who gives a shit about how fast you are. But its pretty stupid- imagine the numbers of cars that would need to be changed to accomodate the measure (on TV they said it would only apply to new cars, so there is still a majority that will be excluded).

BTW, by car only goes 160km on a hill with a tail wind, so i don't care.

[johnny]

God forbid that any of these Einsteins would ever think of raising the level of driver ability/competence instead

[S.]

God forbid that any of these Einsteins would ever think of raising the level of driver ability/competence instead

I reckon... education is FAR FAR better than restriction. There ARE circumstances where you do actually have to break the law (most of which I believe are covered as exceptions, so technically you're not breaking the law)... restricting cars is just dumb, speedos even moreso.

Look at Italy - to reduce their road toll they actually INCREASED their freeway speed limit (to 150km/h)... OH NOES COUNTERINTUITIVE LOGIC that actually works...

[Davf]

I reckon... education is FAR FAR better than restriction. There ARE circumstances where you do actually have to break the law (most of which I believe are covered as exceptions, so technically you're not breaking the law)... restricting cars is just dumb, speedos even moreso.

Look at Italy - to reduce their road toll they actually INCREASED their freeway speed limit (to 150km/h)... OH NOES COUNTERINTUITIVE LOGIC that actually works...

Definitely, Driver training is needed much more then "blacking" out the speedo. NSW government is stupid (we all know that), the rules and ADR's concerning cars and the like, are plain crap. Eg. Motorbike engine put into a car needs to apply to cars emissions (strict as) yet the motorbike's don't have to worry about it. Anyone who makes kit cars would have an idea of what I'm talking about. If you do know, register your car as a hotrod , they get away with everything. I could ramble for days, but I'm O.T too much already.

I think the increase of speed limit would help on some roads, making for a safer, faster trip. The problem is P platers who think they are invincible and can do Brocky specials in suburbia. DRIVER TRAINING IS THE WAY TO LOWER DEATH TOLLS!!!

[MikeT]

What they should do is what they are planning to do with cigarette packets. Next to the speedo behind the perspex, put a graphic picture of a car crash with a message under it (I'm sure that they could find something nice on orgish) naz would love it! :P :P

[wombat]

Hmmmm, the speedo on my datto is out by about 10 or 15 clicks. Think that'll suffice?

[Byatch]

As your speed increases, you fuel consumption increases exponentially, so there is some merrit in maintaining the current speed limits.

Moreover, just because the roads are safer doesn't (to me, at least) indicate that a higher speed limit is in order. So what if 64 less people were killed last year as compared to the year before? Thats still some 333 people who were killed.

If driving were pharmaceutical manufacturing, 333 people per year would not be acceptable. Hell, 1 preson per year would cause uproar. If 1/5th less people died from taking a medication course last year as compared to the year before, there wouldn't be call to up the dose so you get better faster.

(btw, for the slow out there, thats a "metaphor". Thats a phrase implying likeness, without explicitly implying a comparason. This may be new to you, along with mr full stop "." and mister comma ",")

[S.]

What they should do is what they are planning to do with cigarette packets. Next to the speedo behind the perspex, put a graphic picture of a car crash with a message under it (I'm sure that they could find something nice on orgish) naz would love it! :P :P

The TAC already do that, they have gory ads on TV all the time.

Those shit me up the fucking wall as well; if I had the money, I'd either mount a media campaign against them, or take them to court for their ads. They're quite literally LIES. For example, one anti speeding ad shows a bloke doing a HOMICIDAL 55 in a 50 zone (yeah he should be executed for that one), then this girl rides straight through a stop sign and gets smacked by the (clearly homicidal) man in the car. The voiceover then starts saying "It's not an accident that she'll never finish school. It's not an accident that she'll blah blah. It's not an accident... because he was speeding."

I can't express how fucking infuriated I was by that ad. First of all - it was the girl's fault, SHE rode through the stop sign without giving way. Secondly and more importantly, the DEFINITION of "accident" specifies that it is an incident that is NOT INTENTIONAL, thus making the scenario given... omg, an ACCIDENT. They are quite blatantly (I hate using that word but it's the best one here) trying to make anyone who speeds out to be an evil maniac who is DELIBERATELY causing harm to other people. "Not an accident" - those fuckwits should be "not accidentally" taken to court for that shit.

[johnny]

The one they have in Sydney isn't bad. They show how a car washes off most of it's speed in the last ten metres. No real scare campaign, just straight out scientific reasoning. The only problem is, they create a scenario where a truck has pulled out in front of you. Just the same as the girl on the bike, shouldn't they be focussing on the truck driver and his innability to see/notce the car coming and causing an accident?

Why is raod rage on the increase? Because the level of driving ability is getting infuriatingly low!