Open Speed Limit Highway in NT???

[Jim Goose]

And again.. lets believe promises pollies make before an election... call me cynical

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

Of course I know that people voted on many issues. The 130kph was just one of them "old mate".

and you know this how? Exit polls?

Let us not forget that State and Territory funding for roads in hinged around road safety, and speed limits are part of the road safety regime in Australia, like it or lump it. Bottom line: they will risk losing funding IF they give their promise of 'unlimited' speed limits.

The new Government will back-flip and will blame Julia for something else that is not her or her Government fault, your read it here first.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

and you know this how? Exit polls?

Let us not forget that State and Territory funding for roads in hinged around road safety, and speed limits are part of the road safety regime in Australia, like it or lump it. Bottom line: they will risk losing funding IF they give their promise of 'unlimited' speed limits.

The new Government will back-flip and will blame Julia for something else that is not her or her Government fault, your read it here first.

Another urban myth propagated by the unknowing. As I have said many times: the Stuart, Victoria and the Barkly are considered vital defense infrastructure. The feds would not let these hiways fall into disrepair.

I dont have to rely on exit polls, I live here.

I put the chance of getting some kind of de restriction back at 80/20. 80 for and 20 against. So you have, in my view, a 20% chance of a major gloat.

[Outbackjack]

For your reading pleasure......


Dear XXXXX,

I am pleased to advise that the Country Liberals will return the freedom taken from Territorians; the open speed limits on certain roads will be returned.

As a road safety measure we will apply our policy effort where it should be; alcohol, seat belts and driver education.

Regarding motor sports one of our candidates is Ross Bohlin a very keen motor sport enthusiast.

Call him on 0413339417.

Cheers

Terry (Mills, the now cheif minister)


Here is another email from Rick Setter (President of the CLP)



XXXXX ,

Thanks for expressing your views on the Labor Governments highway speed limits. It is Country Liberals policy to reintroduce open speed limits when we are returned to Government and any support your Company can provide would be greatly appreciated. I have forwarded your email to Terry Mills office.

Regards,



Rick Setter

PRESIDENT

Ph: 08 - 8948 1744

Fax: 08- 8948 0656

[flappist]

Which would endanger the whole of Australia by making it more difficult to transport the military as required.

But I really do understand why the do-gooders, wowsers and self appointed saviours of the driving public will get so bitter and twisted about this.

There are three possible outcomes from the instatement of the
open zones.

1) Bloodbath
2) No real change
3) Actual drop in the road toll

The problem is:

If option 1 occurs regardless of the circumstances e.g. 2 unregistered unroadworthy vehicles driven by drunk unlicensed persons with 100 locals in the back hit each other, run into a river and everyone is eaten by crocks, there will be a scream of "told you open zones would cause a this" and a federally funded media beat up to take the focus off [insert issue here].

If option 2 occurs or even worse option 3 then there is a HUGE problem.

The nannyistas will be proven WRONG and that cannot occur.
To many of these self appointed experts there whole reason to exist would be invalidated and I cannot think of anything more unpredictable or dangerous than a rabid zealot with nothing to lose.

There will be some VERY upset people in Monash, the various state treasuries and the loony private car hater groups like "Pedestrian Council".

Getting the nannyistas to look at this with an open mind is like getting some of our superhero members to take their theoretically incredibly fast cars to the track.

You cannot lose if you never compete and interestingly like the open zones the more pressure you put on the "expert" the more angry and personal the retaliatory attack.

Sometimes I really wonder if to some saving lives is secondary to being right......

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by flappist

Which would endanger the whole of Australia by making it more difficult to transport the military as required.

But I really do understand why the do-gooders, wowsers and self appointed saviours of the driving public will get so bitter and twisted about this.

There are three possible outcomes from the instatement of the
open zones.

1) Bloodbath
2) No real change
3) Actual drop in the road toll

The problem is:

If option 1 occurs regardless of the circumstances e.g. 2 unregistered unroadworthy vehicles driven by drunk unlicensed persons with 100 locals in the back hit each other, run into a river and everyone is eaten by crocks, there will be a scream of "told you open zones would cause a this" and a federally funded media beat up to take the focus off [insert issue here]

If option 2 occurs or even worse option 3 then there is a HUGE problem.

The nannyistas will be proven WRONG and that cannot occur.
To many of these self appointed experts there whole reason to exist would be invalidated and I cannot think of anything more unpredictable or dangerous than a rabid zealot with nothing to lose.

There will be some VERY upset people in Monash, the various state treasuries and the loony private car hater groups like "Pedestrian Council".

Getting the nannyistas to look at this with an open mind is like getting some of our superhero members to take their theoretically incredibly fast cars to the track.

You cannot lose if you never compete and interestingly like the open zones the more pressure you put on the "expert" the more angry and personal the retaliatory attack.

Sometimes I really wonder if to some saving lives is secondary to being right......

It was like when recently the drop in speed limits in the Yorke Peninsula in SA saw a dramatic and tragic increase in fatalities, yet when the government was asked why there was a sudden increase in deaths, they said the hugely unpopular rural speed limit decreases played no part...... I wonder if they would of claimed that if there had been a decrease? SA has an inept government anyway so not surprised lol.


It will be actually curious to see the emphasis on drink driving and seatbelts, that should see a real change hopefully. At the moment you can get away with sitting on 150kmh on the 130 limit roads in the NT as a lot of police see it as safe, the problem is you just need one cop who is having a bad day and you are booked, with the return of open limits it will reduce that extra stress on driving vast distances.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Brazen

SA has an inept government anyway so not surprised lol.

well i never. we agree on something

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Bottom line: they will risk losing funding IF they give their promise of 'unlimited' speed limits.

NT has *never* been threatened with federal road funding cuts over its once rural NT-wide derestriction application. Nor was it ever threatened for not imposing speed-limits. This was not the case in the US when the feds imposed the 55mph 'double nickle' (88km/h) national maximum after the 74' arab oil embargo. Here, US states had to show COMPLIANCE in enforcement, no compliance meant reduced, or no federal funds for roads.

Labor have been the only party, Australia wide, since the 60's (first with VIC) and up to the Wran Labor government in NSW in the 70's to have killed the freedom and safety of speed derestriction. I am ever convinced they are the source of mad cow disease:-)

CLP's policy return to derestriction will be along these lines in application;-
a) (//) will be posted on a per_length_of_ road basis, to existing 130km/h zones, BUT only those meeting 'national standard' (AUSROADS) for highways. This is called 'linear' posting of speed management signage.
NT will no longer use (//) as its 'rural default', so no 'geographical' application as was the case prior to 2007. NT highways have sadly deteriorated since 2007 than should have reasonably been expected, and that may impact ability to return (//) on some lengths, CLP are well aware the need to return to earlier per capita levels of funding, federally sourced.

b) I expect, particularly at border points, that the derestriction sign (//) shall be LARGEST measure per AS1742 of 2008 for 'speed signage', and posted on each side of the road facing inbound traffic, WILL bear the words underneath the (//) symbol vis; "DRIVE TO CONDITONS". I had forwarded NT folk a NSW example of this for them to study, with favourable outcome.

* I had discussed the prospect of a 'daytime only' derestriction allowance, and for a night speed-limit application; we looked at the 90-130km/h range. In the end, it was decided that NO speed-limit can ever reflect a true 'safe' travel figure, since condition of a car and its tyres and pressure, road surface, wildlife, weather are all 'variables', and *ONLY* speed derestriction *FORCES YOU*, ABSOLUTELY; - to drive to the prevailing conditions, rather than a speed-limit, which simply becomes a target for too many.

Had suggested NT could look at, more for reasons of political correctness than road safety, limiting speed of L, P1-P2 license holders when in (//) zones by way of 'license category speed-limits', meaning 'the young and inexperienced', could be kept from high, triple digit speeds. We see no evidence that these limits do any good, certainly here in NSW, as we will ALWAYS get young persons, on P's - who will triple digit their cars into trees; limit or no limit. So, such a limit type is pointless.

Besides, federally, we have the ongoing development of ITS and that could cap top speed nationwide, regardless of derestriction allowance, at ADR level, some time into the future.

* Have looked at the possibility of NT adopting two high-vis safety vests for the ADR categories MA, MB and MC to Specification EN471 or AS equivalent, a la EU practice. Plus - the same category application for a warning triangle requirement to UNECE 27R.

Basically NEW MARKET cars, vans, 4WD's sold from dealerships in NT would have the items as standard supply. This will develop further, particularly as NSW is now studying the same.
We cannot do the same with first aid kits or fire extinguishers, the first bit owing a lack of national standard in quality - specifically for car category, the latter owing lack of car fires having regard the total on registration on a cost benifit basis, BUT I expect, with a year or four, we could achieve a first aid kit requirement, nationally. BOTH items would be promoted in the driver handbooks under safety tuition.

new Government will back-flip and will blame Julia for something else that is not her or her Government fault, your read it here first.

NOT owing funding threats, BUT we do have an issue for legal determination, highlighted in similar discussion here at Fordforums earlier:- where those responsible (academics, state road agency staffers, safety bodies and advocates) for AS1742.4 (road speed managment signs), have sucessfully colluded to eliminate all mention of the previously catalogued R4-2 Speed Derestriction sign in that Standards 2008 edition. The intention; to prevent political parties, or parliaments, from reusing the derestriction sign in Australia. WE shall witness then WHO has the most legislative power, a new incoming government bent on improving road safety, or government employees colluding with private companies, police, AAA affilliates, advocates - all of whom are members of the overseeing AS committee.

I would remind state employees, that it is ONLY parliament that can pass enforceable law, this statement needs re-broadcasting every few years in Australia. Parliament is supreme.

The sign remains a part of The UN Convention on Road Traffic (Signs & Signals), where it is catalogued "Sign C,17a - End of all local prohibitions imposed on moving vehicles". AUS contracted the 49' Convention of same, and we remain so bound to it, and its later versions, unless we withdraw in writing.

[RASER]

It's 130km/h on certain roads, and its alleged they only have 2 x police highway patrol vehicles for the whole large territory.
In any case the roads are not the best, wildlife roams, caravaners, cyclists, heat, tourists, potholes, steel grates on the road, livestock i doubt you would want to go to much faster than that anyway, its not really suitable.

Your vehicle GUZZLES fuel at a alarming rate at those speeds.

Been there, done that, nothing special really.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by RASER

It's 130km/h on certain roads, and its alleged they only have 2 x police highway patrol vehicles for the whole large territory.
In any case the roads are not the best, wildlife roams, caravaners, cyclists, heat, tourists, potholes, steel grates on the road, livestock i doubt you would want to go to much faster than that anyway, its not really suitable.

Your vehicle GUZZLES fuel at a alarming rate at those speeds.

Been there, done that, nothing special really.

It is not that you may wish to travel at 200km/h everywhere, it is the removal of restriction and the ability to go at whatever speed is required for as long as required.

To show a simple example:
How many here have exceeded their local highway speed limit while overtaking so as to reduce the time spent on the "wrong" side of the road or to get past a line of slow vehicles before the overtaking lane end?

How many have seen a mobile camera or patrol set up in a place to catch "dangerous speeders" who are taking the only opportunity to overtake relatively safely?

How many have been stuck behind some idiot who is overtaking but will NOT exceed 5km/h less than the limit thereby holding up long lines of traffic and exposing them to potential oncoming vehicles?

(//) also means a quick spurt to 140km/h for 15 seconds while overtaking slow vehicles then drop back to 100 will not lead to loss of license.

[RASER]

Originally Posted by flappist

It is not that you may wish to travel at 200km/h everywhere, it is the removal of restriction and the ability to go at whatever speed is required for as long as required.

To show a simple example:
How many here have exceeded their local highway speed limit while overtaking so as to reduce the time spent on the "wrong" side of the road or to get past a line of slow vehicles before the overtaking lane end?

How many have seen a mobile camera or patrol set up in a place to catch "dangerous speeders" who are taking the only opportunity to overtake relatively safely?

How many have been stuck behind some idiot who is overtaking but will NOT exceed 5km/h less than the limit thereby holding up long lines of traffic and exposing them to potential oncoming vehicles?

(//) also means a quick spurt to 140km/h for 15 seconds while overtaking slow vehicles then drop back to 100 will not lead to loss of license.

Indeed, forgot to mention multiple L O N G trailers towed behind semis aka road-trains, and boy to they hammer along!

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by RASER

It's 130km/h on certain roads, and its alleged they only have 2 x police highway patrol vehicles for the whole large territory.
In any case the roads are not the best, wildlife roams, caravaners, cyclists, heat, tourists, potholes, steel grates on the road, livestock i doubt you would want to go to much faster than that anyway, its not really suitable.

Your vehicle GUZZLES fuel at a alarming rate at those speeds.

Been there, done that, nothing special really.

There are more than two patrol cars between Kulgera and Darwin. Since January 2007 all police battle wagons have radar installed. Wildlife is only an issue at night. Only idiots do any more than 100kph at night. The idiots are usually eastern staters who have never driven here before and tourists. Drunks are also included in the idiot catagory for many reasons. When you say the roads are not the best, what exactly do you mean? The Victoria hiway is a beautiful piece of hiway. The worst places on that are better than the best places on the east coast. That is not conjecture, I rode to Broome not long ago. As far as cattle grids, there are two between Kulgera and Darwin. These will be removed and replaced with white lines in due course.

Pot holes can be a issue straight after heavy down pours. Usually north of Katherine. Again, only idiots would travel at excessive speeds after heavy rains. Roads crews are very aware of this and any damage is very quickly repaired.
As far as caravaners are concerned it is so much easier to deal with them in a (//) environment. Road train are speed limited to 110kph. Again, much safer to deal with these in a (//) environment.

My XR8 (BF manual) in 6th gear returns around 13 litres per 100klms at 160 kph with the wife and kids on board. I dont find that too much of a problem. Maybe YOUR vehicle guzzles fuel at high speeds but mine doesn't.

And you are correct, once you become comfortable at driving/riding at speeds above 130kph it is nothing special really. But it is a skill. I have seen people come here from nanny states and almost soil their pants when I started to accelerate to hiway speed. And that was with the 130 limit. When/if we get the (//) back the members here that have experience at driving at triple figure speeds starting with the number 2 on the open roads perhaps could start a thread with some hints for anyone planning a trip to the NT.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

And you are correct, once you become comfortable at driving/riding at speeds above 130kph it is nothing special really.

It focusses your concentration - quite intensely especially in traffic. Better to be concentrating at 150 than dozing off watching the speedo (if you're not actually in a microsleep) on a straight open road at 100. I'll offer that road safety message for free to any government that wants to take it up.

Originally Posted by RASER

Your vehicle GUZZLES fuel at a alarming rate at those speeds.

Only a poorly designed car perhaps. The Skoda Octavia 1.9l TDI I'm driving still does 6 litres per 100 whether I'm cruising at 100 or 150.

Originally Posted by flappist

To show a simple example:
How many here have exceeded their local highway speed limit while overtaking so as to reduce the time spent on the "wrong" side of the road or to get past a line of slow vehicles before the overtaking lane end?

How many have seen a mobile camera or patrol set up in a place to catch "dangerous speeders" who are taking the only opportunity to overtake relatively safely?

On the Pacific Highway on the NSW north coast there is at least one fixed camera in an overtaking lane. I remember reading a woman's letter to the NRMA complaining that she'd been pinged by the police for exceeding the speed limit while safely overtaking (on wrong side of road). She was admonished by other readers along the lines of "if you can't overtake under the speed limit don't do it". With attitudes like that no wonder we have a problem with road safety.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by new2ford

It focusses your concentration - quite intensely especially in traffic. Better to be concentrating at 150 than dozing off watching the speedo (if you're not actually in a microsleep) on a straight open road at 100. I'll offer that road safety message for free to any government that wants to take it up.

I will argue that higher levels of concentration will make you more than or equal to the fatigue levels you say you would get at 100km/h., and this is a fact. Higher concentration will make you fatigued, this is a proven fact. Fatigue and sleepiness are 2 different things but are related

I just travelled through S.A., N.T. and W.A. doing 18,000 k's in 3 months, not once over 110km/h. I am a former professional truck driver so driving big k's is no big deal to me, particularly at 100km/h. My wife monitors my fatigue levels for me (as wives do - ) and not once did she comment about me getting fatigued and there were days of 700-800 k's driving.

[new2ford]

Big Trev, you take a rest break every 2 hours (as you should). In a country with big distances covering 250 km in 2 hours rather than 150 makes a big difference to the total journey time. That's what's important.

I drive regularly in Europe about 250 km between Plzen and near Nuremberg averaging about 130 km/h on motorway in less than 2 hours and in Australia regularly 150 km between Nowra and Sydney averaging less than 100 km/h on motorway in 2 hours and on the latter journey sometimes I find myself
struggling not to drop off with boredom. On the former I'm very focussed and with it.

In Australia, towns and rest facilities are further apart and rather than observing the 2 hour limit many soldier on to the next stop at the low speed limit, stretching the journey far longer than it should be for safety and fatigue. On motorways and outback roads I think the low speed limits are actually a killer, encouraging boredom, highway hypnosis and microsleeps. I'm waiting for the class actions from victims' families.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

I will argue that higher levels of concentration will make you more than or equal to the fatigue levels you say you would get at 100km/h., and this is a fact. Higher concentration will make you fatigued, this is a proven fact. Fatigue and sleepiness are 2 different things but are related

I just travelled through S.A., N.T. and W.A. doing 18,000 k's in 3 months, not once over 110km/h. I am a former professional truck driver so driving big k's is no big deal to me, particularly at 100km/h. My wife monitors my fatigue levels for me (as wives do - ) and not once did she comment about me getting fatigued and there were days of 700-800 k's driving.

Do you not see the irony in this?

You drove at the speed YOU wanted to taking breaks when YOU felt like it travelling distances that YOU wished yet you abhor the concept of others driving at the speed THEY want to taking breaks when THEY feel like it travelling distances that THEY wish.

Not everyone is the same as you.
People do not feel the same every day.
Conditions vary.

The concept that "The speed is 110km/h" and getting upset when someone disagrees is no different to "going to the dunny at 7:12 AM then eating 2 slices of Tiptop multigrain with 8 grams of Devondale butter and 11 grams of Kraft cruncy peanut butter from a 450g jar" and getting upset when when the dunny is taken for 5 minutes, the butter is woolies and the peanut butter came from a 600g jar.

Is the thought of someone being responsible for their own actions so horrific?

How can you expect anyone to respect your opinion when you have none for theirs?

Sometime when I read this forum "Knock knock knock Penny" springs to mind.......

[EDManual]

Years back I used to do lots of midnight high speed runs, normally I would have been tired at that time, however I would go for about 5 hours doing 750-800km from around midnight to 5am and be more awake than at any time of the day, only due to the fact I was having fun :-) and concentrating extremely hard! Amazing the difference between that and sitting on 100 bored senseless!
I would have my place to go, have a nap before and wake up excited ready to go!

[Romulus]

Might go buy a FG MkII GT and go for a drive in the NT

[prydey]

Originally Posted by flappist

Sometime when I read this forum "Knock knock knock Penny" springs to mind.......

thats not very fair on dr cooper.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by flappist

Is the thought of someone being responsible for their own actions so horrific?

I think it would be wonderful, but it will never happen!!!!

People have proven in recent times that they cannot take responsibility for their own behaviour, I am 55 years old and was taught to take responsibility for my behaviour, yet I see more and more young people not prepared to do this, tell me I lying or overstating the point on this point I dare you!!! I have 4 kids of my own, all adults now, I work with young people all week and I can tell you getting them to take responsibility is near on impossible.

Originally Posted by flappist

Sometime when I read this forum "Knock knock knock Penny" springs to mind.......

Sorry, that was lost on me, I have no idea what you are talking about.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

People have proven in recent times that they cannot take responsibility for their own behaviour, I am 55 years old and was taught to take responsibility for my behaviour, yet I see more and more young people not prepared to do this, tell me I lying or overstating the point on this point I dare you!!! I have 4 kids of my own, all adults now, I work with young people all week and I can tell you getting them to take responsibility is near on impossible.

I don't think homo sapiens has changed much in a few thousand years. What does seem to have evolved in Australia is a presumption by "those in authority" (of various sorts) that all people are stupid and therefore must be nannied. In fact, the great majority of people (young included) are not stupid, but if you continue to treat them as stupid well, you never know, evolution might take effect and we'll all end up stupid thanks to Australian Labor govts and Monash University.

I wonder what you think of those who pass me at 200 km/h on motorways in Europe. Are they stupid? I understand Germany has a lower per capita accident rate than Australia.

And maybe those young people are taking the mickey out of you.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by new2ford

I don't think homo sapiens has changed much in a few thousand years. What does seem to have evolved in Australia is a presumption by "those in authority" (of various sorts) that all people are stupid and therefore must be nannied. In fact, the great majority of people (young included) are not stupid,

At no point did I say they were stupid, go back and read my post, I said they will take no responsibility, please do not mis-quote me.

Originally Posted by new2ford

I understand Germany has a lower per capita accident rate than Australia.

Really? You may want to Google that, and in particular their infra-structure to deal with the high speed accidents that regularly occur

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Really? You may want to Google that, and in particular their infra-structure to deal with the high speed accidents that regularly occur

I did, before I wrote my post:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

Regularly occur? Is that pro rata? Germany has a population of 80 million and is a transit country for many many more international journeys. You wouldn't expect there to be no accidents in such a dense environment. I've been driving back and forth along Via Carolina for 3 months now and I've only seen one accident and read about one other in the news. I expect to see more than that along a regular route in Australia over that time.

I'm not advocating such speeds but in Australia a general raising of motorway and outback limits to 130 (or unrestricted in certain cases of the latter such as NT), where appropriate is most desirable.

[Trevor 57]

I have no issue with higher speed limits, but there is proviso's

* far better and more rigorous training regime
* far better and more rigorous licensing regime
* On appropriate roads (geez I saw roads in W.A. with 110km/h limits that you would struggle to do 90 km/h on safely) - blanket speed limits don't work

I can understand why people from States with great freeways, like rural Victoria and NSW are asking for higher limits, but the skill and knowledge level and the lack of ability to take responsibility are BIG concerns.

I have seen over a 13 year time span the results of lack of discipline in drivers with my time in the VicSES, I have also seen it as a former full-time advanced driver trainer, so I look at the push for higher limits through different eyes than most

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

I have no issue with higher speed limits, but there is proviso's

* far better and more rigorous training regime
* far better and more rigorous licensing regime

And vehicle safety gear required on board vehicles:-) lessons from an HS Europe. Or we could do nothing....

[Trevor 57]

Come on, we have 5 Star ANCAAP ;-)

I have the upper end of what Europe offers in car safety technology last year at a drive day at Sandown - very impressive

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Come on, we have 5 Star ANCAAP ;-)

Passive safety is one thing, active safety is maybe more important. I do get concerned at seeing a Landcruiser belting down a German motorway at 150 (fortunately they're rare in Europe). A few moose test issues there!

I agree that that the skills and awareness of (and respect for) driving protocols need improvement in many Australian drivers - e.g. the lane protocols for motorway driving. But once again, official treatment of drivers as stupid fosters dumbing them down. All they focus on is keeping under the speed limit and watching out for coppers and speed cameras, nothing else matters.

Now that I live in country Australia I find that country residents have good understanding of keep left and overtaking protocols. You can pick the holiday times when the city drivers get on the road and everything goes downhill.

[calais]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

I think it would be wonderful, but it will never happen!!!!

People have proven in recent times that they cannot take responsibility for their own behaviour, I am 55 years old and was taught to take responsibility for my behaviour, yet I see more and more young people not prepared to do this, tell me I lying or overstating the point on this point I dare you!!! I have 4 kids of my own, all adults now, I work with young people all week and I can tell you getting them to take responsibility is near on impossible.



Sorry, that was lost on me, I have no idea what you are talking about.

So as a gen x'er according to you, I cant take responsibility for my own actions, but as a baby boomer your prepared to advocate taking away taking away liberties you were priviledged to have?

Im going to kindly say, speak for yourself there sport.

It started with speed limits, and now your telling us we need training that was never considered necessary back in the day? Hmmmm call it whatever you like but IMHO it is such philosophy which is stripping individuals of their right to make decisions and rightly be held accountable for them.

[XRDeeze]

man this thread is deep

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by calais

So as a gen x'er according to you, I cant take responsibility for my own actions, but as a baby boomer your prepared to advocate taking away taking away liberties you were priviledged to have?

Im going to kindly say, speak for yourself there sport.

It started with speed limits, and now your telling us we need training that was never considered necessary back in the day? Hmmmm call it whatever you like but IMHO it is such philosophy which is stripping individuals of their right to make decisions and rightly be held accountable for them.

A well known fact for you GenX, in 1970 over 1000 people died on the roads in Victoria alone, last year we had just under 300, I think the whole of Australia was just over 1000.

You can prattle on about "liberties you were priviledged to have", but now that you have read what I just posted above you my want to think about your comment. 1000 Victorians dead in 1 year compared to 300 now, yeah we sure have gone backwards -

And yes even our licencing standards have improved, it is not all vehicle design and enforcement. Ask your poor old Baby Boomer parents about how they got their licence.