all 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 22 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Ford Prefect: "I thought cars were the dominant lifeform. I was trying to introduce myself."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 63 points 4 months ago (12 children)

    They are anti car ideology and thats a good thing :)

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -22 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    I don't think you realise how rural parts of NZ are, there's a big chunk of the population for who public transport will simply never be an option.

    Attitudes like yours only serve to piss off a large chunk of the population.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Rural people aren't usually the ones getting reduced speed limits though, no?

    I live in a city and I drive daily. I don't feel any animosity against reduced speed limits, especially when it's obviously done to save lives. What logical reason would you have to be driving 50+ in a highly populated zone?

    Carbrains need to realize that they have an attitude problem, or they will never learn.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    They very much are, there were a number of roads that got reduced from 100 to 80, for example, in the same push for slower speed limits, most of them with no real justification. Side roads that were the responsibility of the local council remained at 100, meaning people often drove on narrower roads to avoid the lower limits.

    There are likely some justified speed reductions being thrown in the bin along with the silly ones, and that's mostly on our previous government.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Our rural roads here in Japan are 60 at most, with most being 40 or 50. I don't think I'd feel safe going a whole lot faster than that. Certain divided, multi-lane roads can get up to 80, but those are different to what I'm thinking of going to actual individual houses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago

    NZ has a similar land area to Japan, with five million people, mostly in urban areas, whereas Japan has something like a hundred million. We've got rural roads that are dead straight for kilometres, and you can drive for 10-15 minutes without a car coming the other way.

    There are also much more winding roads where actually driving 100 would be suicide, of course.

    I seriously wonder if some of the people here have ever been outside an urban area.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Sounds to me like either incompetence or malicious compliance on the part of the department implementing the reductions. Maybe work on fixing that instead of using it as an excuse to rail against the concept entirely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago

    Nah, it was very much an inflexible policy. Previously, the relevant departments had been doing very well with implementing targeted speed reductions in response to known hazard areas.

    And we're going back to that again, fortunately.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Respectability politics never gets anywhere anyway. Let the carbrains get mad, there's no avoiding it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    I was genuinely hoping to have some type of intelligent discussion here, I live in NZ, and I know for a fact that public transport just isn't an option for a large chunk of the population.

    But instead you've responded with "hurr durr car brain."

    I don't know what I was expecting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    The general thinking from .ml types is that you should only ever be living in a city, anyone not living in a city is scum and doesn't deserve to get around. They think food comes from packets materialised by Stalin himself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (8 children)

    Interestingly, it’s about adhering to expectations more than anything else. If you have a road that seems to be fine to travel at a certain velocity and the speed limit is significantly lower, people will still speed and therefore create massive velocity differences between themselves and those obeying the law, causing dangerous circumstances.

    For example, a highway has a posted speed limit of 25. Some will still attempt to use the road for the purpose that it was paved and posted, so now you have some driving 25 and others at near-highway speed. The difference in velocity is the issue.

    The solution? Just paving, signing, painting, etc. correctly. Glad New Zealand found the proper signage

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago

    Driscoll was born in Ireland but living in Croydon, Surrey with her husband and children at the time of her death. She had planned a three-day trip to London to attend a League of the Cross festival. She was in the company of her teenage daughter May and her friend Elizabeth Murphy and was crossing Dolphin Terrace in the grounds of the Crystal Palace in London when she was struck by the driver of a car belonging to the Anglo-French Motor Carriage Company that was being used to give demonstration rides. One witness described the car as being driven at "a reckless pace, in fact, like a fire engine".

    Although the car's maximum speed was 8 miles per hour (13 km/h), it had been limited deliberately to 4 miles per hour (6.4 km/h), the speed at which the driver, Arthur James Edsall of Upper Norwood, claimed to have been travelling. His passenger, Alice Standing of Forest Hill, alleged he modified the engine to allow the car to go faster, but another taxicab driver examined the car and said it was incapable of exceeding 4.5 miles per hour (7.2 km/h) because of a low-speed engine belt. The collision happened just a few weeks after a new act of parliament had increased the speed limit for cars to 14 miles per hour (23 km/h), from 2 miles per hour in towns and 4 miles per hour in the countryside.

    It’s interesting how cultural speed expectations are. So back in 1896 a car going 4.5 miles per hour was really booking it - and I have no doubt it probably was a poor judgenent to reach such speeds considering the poor state of the roads with ample pedestrians and horse carriages going everywhere, lack of rules and training and because the roads were not at all optimized for car travel. But now that ‘reckless’ pace would get you causing an accident for the opposite reason.

    Enforcement surely plays a part, too. If you know the speed limit and that you’ll be busted for sure for going a hair over in a particular stretch, then you’ll probably be on your best behavior. If it’s literally never enforced such that everyone is accustomed to going as fast as seems prudent to themselves, though…

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

    This. Safest speed is the same speed as everyone else.

    I was recently driving down a road that had its speed limit dropped from 100km/h to 60km/h. My wife just did 60, and I told her to speed up so she didn't create a hazard.

    30 seconds later, a local Commodore whips around us on a solid line on a windy road. It had a closing speed of about 30km/h. Everyone agreed it was quite dangerous, but she refused to accept that I was right.

    I'll add a pic. A country road in Victoria, Australia that had no set limit (read: default 100km/h) in 2018.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I find it a little funny that you were downvoted for understanding defensive driving. But I can understand why she would be uncomfortable driving any faster. That road looks thin

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    We have a lot of roads like that in NZ too, just barely two lanes wide. Locals will absolutely do 100 on them though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    I drove a Yaris from Greymouth to Queenstown and it was a really good drive. The whole side of island had one road and it was empty. All the bridges are single-lane.

    Not one speed camera the whole way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago

    He said that like it was a bad thing.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    It's a feature not a bug

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    So, the previous Labour government made some very rash decisions around speed limits, based around the idea that slower is safer, less crash energy etc. This involved lowering speed limits in urban areas, but also on the open road, in many cases from 100 to 80. Obviously, this doesn't help vehicle vs pedestrian crashes, and a vehicle vs vehicle, or vehicle vs stationary object is still bad news.

    This pissed off a lot of people, because they have places to be and shit to do, and our overall road toll actually got worse during this time.

    The incoming National government reversed these changes, and it seems like a handful of them may have been worthwhile after all. This is kinda on Labour though, because they made so many silly changes that the few good ones got thrown out at the same time.

    Overall, we should be looking at our speed limits on a much more case by case basis instead of the broad changes we've been making in the past. It's getting better, with an increasing number of speed limit changes being made at dangerous intersections, for example, and immediately returning to 100, rather than reducing the speed limit on an entire road, for example.

  • source
  • 6 comments in c/fuckcars@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 16 points 4 months ago*

    They are. The problem being...?

    In all seriousness, NZ is extremely car centric and that's sad because it would be prime territory for some focused passenger rail lines especially on North Island.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago

    They are "anti-car ideology," which is good, people should be the priority.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    Word it as such :

    Anti car-ideology

    and watch the debate transform

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    Well, if those lives can only be saved by encroaching on the sacred freedom of vroom vroom, perhaps those people don’t get to live, and their inevitable deaths are a regrettable necessity, and/or part of the great circle of life

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    Yes, and I vote for an anti-car platform.

  • source