Archive for the ‘road safety unofficial’ Category

RAA repeatedly refuses to cooperate on improving road safety   Leave a comment

http://www.raa.com.au/road_safety_home.aspx

The RAA website (link above) suggests that this organisation is dedicated to road safety. It is however not true.  My numerous attempts to make RAA stand against dangerous practices and rules of government have always failed. My recent multiple invitations for RAA to cooperate to improve safety on our roads were declined or ignored. I have mentioned the key problem issues like government corruption, like problem with road rules, problem with policing that is with assessing the actual situation and my own research. Again RAA everytime decline or ignore such invitation.

RAA ignores my calls that government and police refuse to take reports on dangerous drivers or practices. http://systemcorruption.wordpress.com/about/corrupt-universities/

https://roadsafetyunofficial.wordpress.com/baloon-madness-is-business-road-safety-in-adelaide-is-not/

There is no other conclusion than RAA conspiring with government in maintaining our roads very dangerous.  http://systemcorruption.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/raa-another-invitation-to-cooperate-to-improve-road-safety/

https://roadsafetyunofficial.wordpress.com/hoons-rule/

There is time for society to get up independently and do what is right. I have done one research, first in Australia and perhaps in the world on tailgating https://roadsafetyunofficial.wordpress.com/my-research-on-tailgating/ so this can be continued by anyone even by school students. On the other hand we should name and ashame the government and associations like RAA. We should also make them personally responsible for the tragedies they cause or at least allow. Let me remind the readers, the courts or legal system has absolutely nothing to do with public safety, with truth or justice. This is just a legal system, no wise person will ever rely on them to solve social problems, they are not to solve but maintain social problems.

What we can do?

To organise ourselves into interest and action groups and identify the problems as I do, analyze them to check if someone made any error of opinion  and to spread the idea of what is and what is good or bad. Than to demand government to stop dangerous rules and practices and corruption, to ashame the RAA and other offices or organisations.

Please note that if you have average meaning poor knowledge of the problems and are interested in improving road safety,  you may  not understand my action in full. However it is clear that any professional or organisation which is truly dedicated to road safety, will not ignore the reports of corruption and anti safety, will not ignore invitation for cooperation. Well if any unaware decent person hear that one in a hundred drivers drives dangerously, one may either say, it is not so bad or actually it is too high proportion. But if the report shows that one in a hundred drivers actually drives properly, it is extremely serious matter. It is irrational to have any opinion or beliefs in such serious matter. It is wise to actually investigate. No, I do not direct it to a casual reader, I direct it to the “specialists” like ministers, Mike Rann, to Road Transport Department, to Police, to Universitities which consume lots of public money on research but fail to do so, and to organisations like AMA and RAA which claim to be dedicated on improving road safety.  Ignoring research and reports is not rational nor pro safety, it is against safety and conspiracy to maintain dangerous roads.

Road safety campaigner

Posted November 2, 2010 by mmistrz in road safety unofficial, Uncategorized

RAA repeatedly refuses to cooperate on road safety   Leave a comment

http://www.raa.com.au/road_safety_home.aspx

The RAA website (link above) suggests that this organisation is dedicated to road safety. It is however not true.  My numerous attempts to make RAA stand against dangerous practices and rules of government have always failed. My recent multiple invitations for RAA to cooperate to improve safety on our roads were declined or ignored. I have mentioned the key problem issues like government corruption, like problem with road rules, problem with policing that is with assessing the actual situation and my own research. Again RAA everytime decline or ignore such invitation.

RAA ignores my calls that government and police refuse to take reports on dangerous drivers or practices. http://systemcorruption.wordpress.com/about/corrupt-universities/

https://roadsafetyunofficial.wordpress.com/baloon-madness-is-business-road-safety-in-adelaide-is-not/

There is no other conclusion than RAA conspiring with government in maintaining our roads very dangerous.  http://systemcorruption.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/raa-another-invitation-to-cooperate-to-improve-road-safety/

https://roadsafetyunofficial.wordpress.com/hoons-rule/

 

 

There is time for society to get up independently and do what is right. I have done one research, first in Australia and perhaps in the world on tailgating https://roadsafetyunofficial.wordpress.com/my-research-on-tailgating/ so this can be continued by anyone even by school students. On the other hand we should name and ashame the government and associations like RAA. We should also make them personally responsible for the tragedies they cause or at least allow. Let me remind the readers, the courts or legal system has absolutely nothing to do with public safety, with truth or justice. This is just a legal system, no wise person will ever rely on them to solve social problems, they are not to solve but maintain social problems.

What we can do?

To organise ourselves into interest and action groups and identify the problems as I do, analyze them to check if someone made any error of opinion  and to spread the idea of what is and what is good or bad. Than to demand government to stop dangerous rules and practices and corruption, to ashame the RAA and other offices or organisations.

Please note that if you have average meaning poor knowledge of the problems and are interested in improving road safety,  you may  not understand my action in full. However it is clear that any professional or organisation which is truly dedicated to road safety, will not ignore the reports of corruption and anti safety, will not ignore invitation for cooperation. Well if any unaware decent person hear that one in a hundred drivers drives dangerously, one may either say, it is not so bad or actually it is too high proportion. But if the report shows that one in a hundred drivers actually drives properly, it is extremely serious matter. It is irrational to have any opinion or beliefs in such serious matter. It is wise to actually investigate. No, I do not direct it to a casual reader, I direct it to the “specialists” like ministers, Mike Rann, to Road Transport Department, to Police, to Universitities which consume lots of public money on research but fail to do so, and to organisations like AMA and RAA which claim to be dedicated on improving road safety.  Ignoring research and reports is not rational nor pro safety, it is against safety and conspiracy to maintain dangerous roads.

 

Road safety campaigner

Posted November 2, 2010 by mmistrz in road safety unofficial

Hoons introduce the road rules in Australia   Leave a comment

The hoon practices include speeding, heavy acceleration, no regard to cyclists or safety on the road, no common sense, no regard to an environment, no responsibility but imposing danger and chaos.  The newly proposed road rules as attached at the bottom of this site and marked, show all those qualities.

Weather the government become effectively a big hoon or allowed hoons to rule is not as important as is the fact that government introduce chaos, and rules which are a hallmark of dangerous hoons.

Corruption and irresponsibility are more open than ever.  It is very clear that the rules are not meant to improve safety and driving efficiency nor intended to be known by all drivers.

Australian road rules traditionally are a bad set of rules but getting worse and more complex.

The proposed draft marked and commented by me is listed below so you can click and view it and may add your comments and input.

The draft does not specify nor imply the purpose. I raise this because the rules suppose to regulate road traffic in such a way that ensures first – safety for all users, second – free traffic flow free of conflicts and confusion, thirdly – be fair and just as well as logical and use common sense. This set of rules fail in all those aspects.

The proposed set of rules is purpouseless. The rules do not intend to be known to all drivers, therefore it is pointless exercise. As we live in Australia, some older drivers never had to learn rules decades ago, and if they had, the rules did and continue to change but there was never requirement for all drivers to update their knowledge to learn new rules. As drivers age, their memory of the rules even if they do not change, fades rapidly. So without mandatory road rules update every two years, the new edition of road rules is entirely pointless. It is pointless from good citizen point of view. It is an excellent revenue raising tool. Nobody knows rules except those who punish drivers knowing that they do not know rules. So the system is designed to be unfair and definitely not put safety as priority. The rules are designed to disadvantage the society.

My experience is that most problems introduce/maintain road “specialists” that is police officers and researchers who claim to work on the field for 15 or 2o years. They believe they know everything, while they do not know the rules , do not understand them nor can think clearly because their own practice disallow them. They insist in dangerous practices and are unwilling/unable to introduce sensible changes. They talk and act against logic and common sense.

The rules are illogical and lately allow if not promote dangerous practices. Many rules are far from specific leaving room for powerful to hit hard powerless drivers. It is an exercise of government attacking innocent citizens. Most of those proposed rules are marked on the draft.

Rules are drawn by people having no idea about cycling. Rules are created from point of view and for car drivers, at expense of cyclists. The most irresponsible and illogical and dangerous rule is proposition that driving too slowly is not permitted. Unrealistic example was given, the situation which hardly ever can be seen in practice. It states that driving at 20km/h at 80 zone is wrong. No, it is the most safe one can perform. The slower driving the safer. It may not be practical from traffic flow point of view but without properly defined minimum speed, this is nonsense rule allowing police to punish innocent drivers. Not even more realistic example be sensible without proper definition and rule of minimum speed, would make sense. On the other hand, the only minimum speed on freeway rule that is 40km/h is very impractical therefore unwise. Judging by modern traffic situations, this minimum should be raised to 70 or 80km/h. Well while talking on slow driving, this is an imaginary idea because other than freeway, it is not defined and only a speculation. Anyway, what it may be that police would consider as too slow on 60 zone? Would 40km/h be considered as too slow? In practice unwise officers say if you drive less than 10km/h below speed limit it is too slow. Logically, it is wrong because 40 is defined legally on freeway as minimum as ok, than how 50 can be too slow on 60 zone? Forget about drivers reaction when someone drive 10km/h slower than limit, police also issues fines for what they say a slow driving. All is  not only illegal but also illogical.

I do propose that we do change our thinking on speed. The idea of limit should mean limit and not cruising speed. It is pointless to argue with me that on road streach X or Y the speed should be N. If specialists assess that safe speed on the specific road is N let the speed limit be say 10km higher and be enforceable as limit and not treated as cruising speed.

Next point is that there must not be imposed as is the case at present (but there is an effort to introduce vague idea of too slow driving) in metro areas as it is in general wrong to dictate what speed driver should drive. There are also countless good reasons to drive slowly. Government here in Adelaide refuse to install proper (at all) street names so driver knowing an address would be able to read which road or street to turn to and building numbers. It is about impossible in Adelaide city for example to find the building number even when you expect is somewhere here. Other causes include your feeling. You may be stressed by other hostile drivers, so you have to slow in order to drive safer. Traffic flow is another issue altogether and is beyond the scope of this blog on the rules.

The draft of the rules is far too complex even to consider it will be understood and observed by all drivers. Such a set of rules must be tailored to an average driver of IQ 90 and not 120. From my experience, many if not most police officers and other officials have poor knowledge and understanding of rules. It is not known to me that any minister for transport or road safety knows rules well. How than an average driver of IQ 90 or elderly driver can understand them? No chance. So the rules are useless. They are created to judges how to use them against innocent (if rules are not mandatory to learn than all drivers are innocent) drivers. Australian road rules are not meant to be used by drivers. Drivers training itself in South Australia is far from acceptable. The rules would also be so simple and logical that any driver of IQ90 should be able to figure out the correct procedure in split second. Current set of rules does not offer that. The current set actually introduces confusion and conflict on the road. It actually introduce more conflicting situations than in earlier editions. This is very irrational to call such proposition a legal rules.

The rules as they are proposed not only visibly give priority to car drivers over the cyclists but also allow drivers to behave dangerously against vulnerable cyclists.

I propose to introduce simple rule of using common sense and another general rule that no rule nor anyone should put anything in front of safety. Safety should get absolute priority.

I propose to introduce the new rule banning tailgating. The rule makers “forgot” it. Or they have no ability to think in terms of safety.

I propose introduction of rules ensuring safety to cyclists, like to give cyclist 1m space when car overtake. I am both cyclist and driver with perfect record. Encouraging cycling and giving some privileges is good for cyclists and drivers. The more cyclists the less cars, less traffic and healthier we become.

I propose to introduce new rule to give priority to cyclists on round abouts and crossing roads. Imagine cyclist waiting on red light. At present when cyclist start, you in a car behind drive very slowly because cyclist have small acceleration and speed. You swear and get upset, unless you have high IQ and good attitude. All is pointless thanks to Australian authorities. My proposition gives cyclist priority, similar logic which allow bus to start on from traffic lights ahead of cars when B lights lit. The letter B should also mean Bicycle, so bus and bicycle start, cross the road and on the other side cyclists is cruising in his full speed but cars can at least cross the intersection at their speed and not be hindered by slow cyclist. It makes sense, is good for cyclists and also for car drivers.

There are number of issues to be solved, but this is just a sample of them. Number of them are marked on the document below.

Feel free to download your own copy and make your own comments if you do not agree with mine very much. Or if you agree, do not leave it as is, please give feedback to your MP and to road transport authority. Good rules are good for all. They are bad because people do not challenge authorities.

I do propose also as is the case in other countries not to call crashes an accidents. Accident is an act of God, crash is both, driver fault or unavoidable event.

Finally, I propose to introduce a new here but well known in Europe rule of safe speed.

See the document below where I explained it.

(number of free pdf readers like foxit enable to read the document below along with my remarks in color).

Road rules 2009 commented

Road safety campaigner

Baloons are important, road safety is not in Adelaide   Leave a comment

DSCF7988For years the South Australian government allowed the baloons to be moved over the bicycle path and onto the road itself. Government ignore all reports and allow this dangerous practice to continue.
Baloon madness

Obsessed business management goes with business on the street, creating third world bazar.  Because we in South Australia have no government which care for law and order, we do have disorder.

This problem exist in that particular spot for years. It is a major road, North East rd.  Does it mean that no police officer, no minister or any politician, no transport department nor even a single scientist drive there and observed it at any time? It is impossible. Or perhaps they do not understand  that this is potential serious road danger? Possible but not likely. Lately one of the transport dept. officer have expressed his views that it is dangerous upon viewing the photos.  Two possibilities remain viable. That government does not care at all about road safety, and second that they deliberately allow danger.

In that case I favor the idea that government does not care about road safety at all. With this goes well the fact that Premier Mike Rann nor any other minister nor any official cared to reply or to stop this problem.

I cannot imagine that if the Premier’s office rang this business, the practice to continue. Or that Rann’s office contacted police department to instruct them that police duty is to not tax innocent speeding drivers but to fine heavily the business operators who can afford to pay more and are creating an obvious danger.

*********

Mr Premier,     (20/06/09)

Please find the attached document as a souvenir of your achievement in government.

Call yourself a responsible.

Road safety campaigner

~~~~ attached document

Baloon madness takes priority over road safety in SA

20/06/09

What our government have in common with common sense? Not much as can be seen on the photos http://picasaweb.google.com/niezmienny/BaloonMadnessPriorityOverRoadSafety#

Anarchy characterise with no effective government management. While it is true in SA about government is general, the road safety is very clear example of it. The business people do what they want without any regard to road safety. Police everyday drive there and they do not care. It is well known that police cannot be too intelligent, and is it also known that they do not have adequate road safety knowledge, nor pro safety attitude. They cannot see what is happening almost every day.

It is natural that business may be pushing the boundaries in advertisement but in this case the electrical overhead wires seem to be the limit and sideways the road itself. All we need is government asking: how many people were killed by this?

If this question is wise than imagine thousands of speeding motorists may ask same question. Will government accept it as an excuse?

So clearly government is not interested in road safety but in imposing own agenda.

Sensible people also have baloons but they are secured by 5cm string, why SA Lounges have often over a metre and on the kerb where wind blows in the face of any driver and very dramatically in the face of cyclists or motor cyclists. Cyclist wanting to avoid it, may turn into middle lane and get hit by an incoming car. This is not important, as long as SA Lounges advertise… what they advertise? Ah, baloons.

Police travel there every day, politicians do travel and cannot see that, “wise” scientists conducting research on factors contributing to road danger and they cannot see it. If however tragedy happen, the official on media with sad face declare: it is unfortunate accident… oh we have to do something about… perhaps we should talk to the shop owner is he/she thinks it is too dangerous? And motorists, be careful of the baloons when you drive.

Scientists come up with brilliant solution – baloon detection and warning device, it costs only…. and business goes on and everybody is happy thereafter.

There is one explanation why most people would not bother to report this problem. Anyone who saw it, ring… police, whom else? Police is to make sure that road safety rules and regulations are being enforced. But when police tell you that they are not interested and that it is your problem. If police officer is intelligent and polite one may tell you ring council because it is council’s problem. When you ring council, they treat you as you just came from another planet. If you insist, after half an hour and lots of phone calls, you are talking to somebody who is “responsible” for this problem. One promise you to investigate and fix this problem or simply to talk to the shop owner if you know the exact address, the phone number and the manager’s name. Even if the council employee talk to the management, then the story repeats over and over starting with baloons and you ringing the council again.

So in practice if you once decide to ring police and then council and have stupid talk with them for more than half an hour and the end result was as to start with, then you will never ever ring them no matter what.

It points only to conclusion that government have business in keeping roads unsafe.

Road safety campaigner

***************

Over well than a year, I’ve reported to numerous offices including police and ministry, and nothing has caused them to stop this dangerous practice.

The government would surely acted if it brought them more revenue.  So the government does not care about society, about law and order but about our money.

All that can be described simply as a wide spread corruption. All mentioned and implied offices do consume large amounts of public money and they ensure no safety nor to take public reports seriously.  Clear corruption.

************************************

Update to the saga.   24/10/09

The government deliberately allow problems to flourish.  I do not intend to say why, but that it actually happens.

1. For years I reported to the government about this particular problem with result as I would not reported at all.

2. Last week I’ve contacted an officer responsible for road safety at Transport Department and showed him the photos. He commented that it is clear that the business creates potential problem and that police is definitely responsible for that, not department.

3. I let know the university head of road safety research team about the problem. No reaction.

4. I contacted Holden Hill police station. The female officer have contacted me assuring that business manager shorten the balloon thread and hopefully no more problems will be at that spot.

5. Last Friday going by, I spotted the baloon madness continues. Tried to contact HH police station. Did not managed because nobody answered the phone. Contacted police intelligence, they refused to take it on because it is not their business. Contacted 131444 police call centre, and an officer declared that he will not sent police there.  He referred me to the local council. I contacted council which refused to take any action because it is not their jurisdiction but of the Transport Department. I remind that department refuse to take any action because it is police matter.  Well, nobody assume responsibility for that.

The Premier Mike Rann, ministers, researchers, police and transport department also media are not interested in restoring an order, all are happy to see disorder.  I have not found any politician interested in law and order, in road safety.

This is an open and wide spread corruption.

Posted October 20, 2009 by mmistrz in road safety unofficial

Tagged with , ,

What minister says and does   Leave a comment

Our SA minister for transport have proudly announced on local radio that he have achieved significant improvement in traffic management. The traffic lights are already set in such a way that drivers will hardly ever stop on read lights. It will be free traffic flow from now.

Having experience with government that things are usually opposite to what they declare I immediately started to pay more attention on our local main road, the North East Rd at Modbury. My personal impression was that minister lie. My impression was that it is exactly opposite to what he said. That eventually traffic lights get worse rather than better. Not lightly I form such important opinion.

Today 1/10/09 I’ve sacrificed some time to see if I am wrong and unreasonably biased against minister or government. Please make your own judgment on the figures below from a test.

The test on the stretch of 700m with 4 sets of traffic lights, 2 of which are to/from TTP shopping centre. The test was only for cars driving on NE rd from St Agnes direction towards city. The test was also done for cars which stopped at traffic lights set number zero, (T with Golden Grove rd) and noted on how many if any traffic lights they would be stopped by lights. Due to terrain it was impossible to view all 4 sets so only 3 were observed. Test conducted for 10 cycles starting at 10:49.

1. cars stopped at 1st lights
2. cars stopped at 1st lights
3. cars stopped at 2nd lights
4. cars did not stopped on 1st nor second
5. cars stopped at 2nd lights
6. cars stopped at 1st and 2nd lights
7. cars stopped at 1st lights
8. cars stopped at 1st and 2nd lights
9. cars stopped at 1st and 2nd lights
10. cars stopped at 1st lights

Driving there as a local, I must state as it is. Almost always the 3 set of lights stops cars. It is NE + Reservoir Rd. I estimate it stops 95% of trips I make. So the statistic above is incomplete and shows only the 500m or less and does not show almost certain stop at 3rd set of lights. It is also true that extremely rarely no lights stop me on entire route of 700m.

Another phenomenon is very clear at those lights that they often and in particular at night or at weekends the green phase is so short that no single car is allowed to cross the intersection from stop on green lights entirely. The green is so short that you cross when red is on. Just one car, not 21.

The mismanagement and free traffic flow and truthfulness of the minister are obvious, but there are some more aspects of this issue to be mentioned.

The frequent start and stop forces drivers to use more petrol, more oil and wear car. All increases tax and government revenue. Unfortunately it frustrate drivers which get more sick and make more problems. It is inevitable.

Some try to be smarter and sometimes it works. If they accelerate very hard and speed on those lights with no camera, they achieve free flow but at expense as just explained. So the government promote speeding and hard acceleration. All dangerous, expensive and anti environmental.

Another test was just conducted from point of view of an average driver.  I did the note of how many times I had to stop driving from St Agnes towards the city at this stretch of 700m.  Stop 0 (zero) is the T of NE with GG Rd. Test conducted as happen over the period of 2 weeks.

stopped at lights Nos:

  1. 1,2
  2. 3
  3. 0,1
  4. 0,1
  5. 0,2
  6. 0,3
  7. 0,1
  8. 3
  9. 0,1
  10. 2

Not once I could go through this time without stopping at all at those 4 sets of lights.

The senior specialists at Transport Dept in Adelaide commented that this is not purpously but by accident the lights operate that way. I replied that it is against simple statistic, so it’s wrong excuse.  If the incident of stopping was 50% or less it could be a valid excuse, if it is almost every time they stop you, it is a deliberate act.

It makes it worse in light of minister’s lie in media that they made an effort that hardly ever lights will stop you because they are synchronized.  In a bigger picture, the ministers and government do nothing for the society’s benefit and almost always against and what they say is an opposite to what they do.

Now let me bring one more real dilemma to be solved.

Assuming that carbon tax will be implemented. Who will pay it just for the portion of unnecessary and forcibly increased fuel usage? The victimised drivers or the government?
Government cause that, therefore drivers must pay.

Everything is ok, nobody will complain, that’s why government does what one please.

Who said that Modbury is the only area in Australia that such anti-social practice is in place?

Road safety campaigner