Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Some interesting reports from Monash Uni Accident Research C

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Kamikaze_Kawasaki, Feb 10, 2006.

  1. It seems that everyone who disagrees with speed cameras and how they are used, are all merely "confused people".

    That pretty much sums up the general attitude of the report towards any naysayers of speed cameras.

    Nice way to fob off any/all criticism.

    "Oh, you don't agree? You're just confused!"
  2. Who funds these guys? The government? Lot's of pro-government statement in there along the lines of "the community has concerns but they are just wrong"

    In regards to the tolerance on speeding in Victoria, interesting that while the Police don't make any allowance for the Australian Standard tolerance on car speedo's, they allow a tolerance on their own speed cameras! They have to have the camera accurate to within 3kph and they are regularly checked for this. They then take off 3kph in the stated speed on the fine so that you have to be doing at least this much. They do this to avoid it being contested, missing the point that if motorists can't be held accountable for errors in the Police measuring devices then how can we be held accountable for errors in our otherwise roadworthy speedos. It is a gross double standard and is unfair to motorists who are driving/riding in good faith within the speed limit.

    All the report did was try to explain and justify the "incorrect" community perception of this. I sure as hell won't be participating in any survey these guys ever put out. Because it seems all that will do is allow them to claim another person surveyed in a report that then arbitrarily espouses the government line.
  3. :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

    well said :grin:

    Cheers :cool:
  4. Re: Some interesting reports from Monash Uni Accident Resear

    i also stumbled-across this site recently,
    and found it to be very interesting.

    at the time i was looking for some research that attempted to correlate
    an individuals collecting of demerit points versus instances of fatal crashes,
    something that has bugged me for ages :idea:
    and i actually found it! :!:

    i read through the whole report and found a passage that suggested, in comparison,
    those that hold a motorcycle endorsement on there licenses,
    were over-represented when it came to demerit points,
    or looking at it from the other side,
    they were under-represented when it came to fatalities.

    however this was dismissed as an insignificant difference.

    when was the last time you heard of motorcycles riders being treated and an insignificant difference!? :mad: :evil:
  5. You have to understand that there is a safety industry. It goes like this:

    1. Road accidents are good stories for newspapers: workplace deaths are more common, but they take place on private property so the reporter can't barge in, so they ain't 'news'. Roads are public space and accidents are always visually spectacular.

    2. Politican either wants more money, or wants to appear to be responding to the latest accident. Or both.

    3. Researcher wants to get grant to keep herself in a cushy university job. Collecting statistics is easy, and road accidents are well documented and thus easy to research. So data correlation that has nothing to do with causality is the go.

    4. Govt. wants 'research' to back the latest fine increase/speed camera/satellite tracking. They won;t pay for research that doesn't support their policies...

    5. You pay.