Australia is preparing to sign an international road safety declaration in Sweden that endorses a 30km/h limit on suburban roads in response to "traffic injuries, air quality and climate change".

With the idiocy of global warming scam growing by the minute, yet another attack on our life style. Anyone who thinks this is likely to be the last restriction on our use of cars is pretty dumb. It won't be just electric cars, but soon we will be reduced to golf buggies or even less for private mobility.

The Greens, & increasingly the left, [just look at the Democrats GND], want us back on the feudal manor, restricted to a few kilometers of our birth place, & easier to control.

Hasbeen, given that you are a pretend engineer I'm sure you must find a lot of things like this extremely confusing.

What Has been said is correct according to The Australian of 21 Dec 1919.

"Australia is preparing to sign an international road safety declaration in Sweden that endorses a 30km/h limit on suburban roads in response to “traffic injuries, air quality and climate change”.

Nationals leader Michael McCormack is scheduled to attend the Global Ministerial Conference on Road Safety on February 19, where he will join other transport and infrastructure ministers in ratifying the Stockholm Declaration, which will be referred to the UN.

A draft obtained by The Weekend Australian includes a preamble recommending integration of road safety with UN Sustainable Development Goals, including climate action, gender equality and reduced inequalities targets.

The summit is expected to endorse speeding up the “shift toward cleaner, safer and more affordable modes of transport, incorporating higher levels of physical activity such as walking, cycling and using public transit”.

Clause seven of the draft declaration suggests mandating lower speeds on urban roads, which would have a significant impact on Australian residential limits, currently 50km/h.

It resolves to strengthen “law enforcement to ensure zero speeding and mandate a maximum road travel speed limit of 30km/h … in residential areas and urban neighbourhoods within cities as efforts to reduce speed will have an impact on both road traffic injuries, air quality and climate change”.

Never heard such a load ever.

We currently have suburban streets with a 50 limit , where there are no houses and no reason for the limit not to be 100.

Apparently a couple of whacky councils in the People's Socialist Republic of Victoria have already decided to try it. Deputy PM McCormack is in it up to his neck, but he also has his own rogue opinions on further-action-on-climate-change. The real PM says that he isn't interested do things people overseas want. So, it's hard to see a 30kph speed limit swanning through without a hiccup.

However, with mass immigration and lack of infrastructure, it will soon be impossible to move around our cities by car at all, let alone at 30. There should be an opportunity for a lot more speeding fines at the lower limit before we become totally gridlocked. It's all about money.

It is already happening with the clowns called planners.

In my district we have had a few multi million road upgrades. On Beenleigh Beaudesert road, 25 years ago a narrow goat track with crumbling edges the speed limit was 100 Km/H. After much improvement including widening & resurfacing, it was suddenly reduced to 80 KM/H.

Mow multi millions on widening, smoothing curves & again resurfacing much has been reduced to 70 KM/H.

Two other areas were similarly greatly improved, then had the speed limit dropped another 10KM/H. For hundreds of millions all we got was a few kilometers of bike lane, where we never see a bike.

Compared to us our grand kids are going to have a miserable sardine like life, if our kids don't start fighting back very soon.

As long as the Bogan component of this society has a free reign, the only effective way to control stupidity on the roads is by enforcing speed limits.
Only a few days ago my car side window was shattered by stones flung from some idiot's wheelies on a gravel carpark.
I'm sure he wouldn't have been so stupid if he'd have had reasonable mentality teachers !
Or, had served in a National Service !

'Hot Wheels' Hassy, what you fail to recognise is that road safety should be paramount. Your stupid distortion that its "The Greens, & increasingly the left, (who) want us back on the feudal manor, restricted to a few kilometers of our birth place, & easier to control." Ridiculous, then you prattle on about a road in your locality, more nonsense. Lets examine the facts, and not be mislead by your political drivel. Australia 1929, national road toll 1,145 or 181 per 100,000 vehicles, today (2018) that number is 1,137 or 4 per 100,000 vehicles. Should The Greens and the other evil lefties take credit for this spectacular decease in the road toll? I think not, but rather credit should go to those with the nouse and foresight to see that such things as, vehicle safety design improvements, better roads, more, not less regulation, driver education, law enforcement. Let good old 'Hot Wheels' run the show, I would not be surprised if the road toll was not 1,100 but 111,000!

Wow, the amount of panic in response to a quite reasonable plan is astounding!

As everyone's so far neglected to provide a link to the document in question, it's at http://tinyurl.com/stockholm-declaration

Now, have a look at what this seemingly contentious excerpt actually says:
10. Focus on speed management, including the strengthening of law enforcement to prevent speeding and mandate a maximum road travel speed limit of 30 km/h in areas where vulnerable road users and vehicles mix in a frequent and planned manner, except where strong evidence exists that higher speeds are safe,

Do you comprehend that?
| in areas where vulnerable road users and vehicles mix in a frequent and planned manner,
NOT on all urban roads.
NOT everywhere that's currently zoned 50.

I expect if you think about it, you'll understand what kinds of roads this applies to. Roads where there's so little traffic the council haven't bothered to construct a footpath alongside. Roads where you used to kick a football (except for some of the posters here who are so old they used to do that everywhere).

"Tis a sensible move to improve road safety, blindly opposed by the Murdoch Press, SevenWest and a the far right.

Thank you Aidan,

First thing when I saw this thread was to check the date, making sure it is not the 1st of April.

Next, I was discussing with my family what activities we will need to give up as a result, whether we could still survive and whether we should move, either out to the country-side (with all those fires, yeah) or perhaps out of Australia altogether.

Your last post brought down my blood-pressure back to normal. Thank you again.

I don't see why everyone has been thrown into confusion, I picked up on it immediately when I was the first to respond, saying:

'Hasbeen, given that you are a pretend engineer I'm sure you must find a lot of things like this extremely confusing.'

Dear Aiden,

Thanks for that.

It isn't unusual for ol' Hasbeen to beat these things to death given half a chance. It is good to have someone else give him a tug on the reins.

Dear Hasbeen,

How's it going old cock? Good. You really do need to stop thinking this is a right wing echo chamber. You will get pulled up when you try and feed guff like that.

The hole where the this speed nonsense was instigated on behalf of the UN - Sweden, which has done such a good job of allowing itself to be over run by Muslims - has had its central bank drop Australian bonds because, you guessed it, we are not doing enough about climate change.

Perhaps Morrison might bear this in mind as he is boxing his deputy's ears for entertaining another attempt from overseas to interfere in our laws. It's hard to pick the biggest offender when it comes to interfering with Australia's internal affairs: the Chinese Communist Party or the United Nations

I think things are actually worse than we think. It took friends travelling north, two and a half hours to travel the distance from Woodburn to Ballina last week, 40klm.
That would equate to a speed limit of 15 Klm PH, on the Pacific highway in NSW. Roughly jogging speed.

Dan

Diver Dan,

My son-in-law told me, one night at Chatswood Sydney it took him 40 minutes to travel 1km home, that's 1.25km/hr, not bad.

Hassy, I do believe in your case it would be wise if they brought back that good old road rule; A man walking with a red flag should proceed in front of any vehicle driven by your good self.

Anyway people over the age of 80 should not hold a drivers licence! Old farts are the biggest danger on the roads.

A man walking with a red flag should proceed in front of any vehicle driven by your good self.
Paul1405,
A red flag ? What a great idea ! We should have a bloke walking ahead of Greenies & indoctrinated hoons exiting our education facilities !
People only become stupid during exposure to education. Not even the naturally stupid are as stupid as the educated ones !

The alarming thing about this is not the speed limit - which will be a fizzer like everything that comes out of the UN - but the fact that the Australian peasantry is accepting of foreign interference in our affairs.

What a sick joke the UN is: it can't stop China from building illegal islands in the South China Sea; it can't do anything about North Korea firing rockets; it can't handle illegal immigration; it can't do anything about poverty, rapacious war lords - anything important. - so it pokes it's nose into domestic speed limits! It is embarrassing for any civilised Western country to be a member of it.

"People only become stupid during exposure to education. Not even the naturally stupid are as stupid as the educated ones !"

Indy, is that your justification for your total lack of education.

ttbn,
Why do you regard the results of Australia's decision to cooperate internationally as "foreign interference in our affairs"?

Australia (Victoria and SA) was the first to make seat-belt use compulsory. Other countries followed our example. Presumably this make us guilty of of being a foreign country interfering in other people's affairs.

Paul, Indy has just demonstrated that on his own criterion (more education=greater stupidity) he has a PhD in Psychology.

And you MR OPINION, what's your claim to fame? At least HASBEEN enjoyed a very successful career in the Navy as an aviator, which requires a high level of technical skill! And you, what've you got to boost your hitherto 'claimed' technical expertise? Squat I'd imagine!

HASBEEN possess's a basic life skill, called pragmatism. He's a realist, he lives in the real world, unlike you sunshine, but the rules of propriety inhibit me from telling you precisely from whence you've come!

The National's leader McCormack or whatever it is has already said
that 30km/hr would not work in Australia.
The 40km/hr school zone causes a significant jam up near here every day.
There is a problem in that the UN keeps coming up with mad trendy
proposals on all sorts of subjects. Remember the one on immigration
that caused a rumpus last year? I think it died a natural death when
only those countries who wanted to get rid of people signed up.

"The 40km/hr school zone causes a significant jam up near here every day."

The situation before the introduction of lower speed limits around schools, morning and afternoon during school days, about 4 hours a day for 200 days a year, coupled with more aggressive policing, eg catching illegal parkers and speeders, has resulted in children's lives being saved. Too bad about some small measure of inconvenience for a selfish few. Bazz do you choose a child's death over jam up? I'll choose jam up any day.

And another mad UN proposal see the one on Religious loviness on OLO.

Dear Paul1405,

I like your response to Bazz.

I would like to add that it is a good thing that we have laws to protect us from the Bazzes of the world.

For b^*&(*Y hell sake Paul, do you deliberately read in to every post
you open your own biases against the poster ?
You jumping on every crack you can find is dam boring !
I never said anything about the school zones being a bad thing.
I reported that they cause traffic jams.
The implication of what I wrote was a 30km zone everywhere would be worse, but you decided, here is a way I can get at Bazz.

That is pathetic.

That is pathetic.
Bazz,
Yeah just as their lives & mentalities ! The Git assoc. of Australia is using OLO as their monthly news letter.

Bazz, I simply put a question to you;

Bazz do you choose a child's death over jam up? A simple yes, no answer. You wedged that comment between two negatives;
"that 30km/hr would not work in Australia." A negative from McCormack, I don't know if that was a blanket statement from McCormack, was he referring to a 30km/hr universal speed limit, or something else. Then after the jam up comment from you came with another negative in; "There is a problem in that the UN keeps coming up with mad trendy proposals" That would imply all UN proposals are mad trendy proposals, there being no sane trendy proposals from the UN. In that way the reader is led to believe the jam up is also negative, and should be avoided as it may have been back in the good old days when school children were being run over without a 40km/hr speed limit.

Bazz,

There is no proposal for a universal 30km/hr universal speed limit. As Aidan pointed out, Hasbeen's opening statement was not factual.

Hasbeen said "that endorses a 30km/h limit on suburban roads in response to "traffic injuries, air quality and climate change". Implying that would apply to ALL suburban roads. The actual wording from Aidan reads differently; "the strengthening of law enforcement to prevent speeding and mandate a maximum road travel speed limit of 30 km/h in areas where vulnerable road users and vehicles mix in a frequent and planned manner, except where strong evidence exists that higher speeds are safe".

"Australia is preparing to sign an international road safety declaration in Sweden that endorses a 30km/h limit on suburban roads in response to “traffic injuries, air quality and climate change”.

This is treason.
Since when did I vote to adopt foreign policies?
I don't pay rego to be reduced to a bloody walking pace.

"Why do you regard the results of Australia's decision to cooperate internationally as 'foreign interference in our affairs'?

When you say 'cooperate internationally' what you actually want is Aussies to pull their pants down and pull their bum cheecks apart for whatever grovelling Brussel-arse licking sellout in a suit decides is best for his career.

Screw you, screw the suit-wearing sellouts, and screw Brussels.

I want Australian politicians to start paying attention to what actual Australians want.
Not immigrants pretending to be 'Aussie'.
And not unelected foreign scumbags who think they know whats best for me.

As a 10 generation Aussie, I'd like to say I'm starting to hate this country and all the grovelling PC lickass bs that goes along with it.

This country's run by a bunch of pissweak little yes-men.

Just because people desire something doesn't automatically make it qualify as need ! Some people are incapable of ever working out what they need & what's best for them. There is much proof that at times, people need to have decisions made for them.

Armchair Critic, BRAVO!
Now that's the kind of response and attitude that is missing in this country.
Good for you and shame on all of you who would deride or dis-agree with AC.
For as long as I can remember, Aussies have been, and still are the slackest living creatures on earth.
They have had it so good that they have lost touch with reality and the ability to reason and differentiate between good and bad.
GW or CC, whatever, are just another example of believing everything you hear, but did anyone actually question it, look into it, research it?
NO!
Because they're too busy having a good time, BS-íng to each other.
I have read the offending article, and I understood it correctly.
What I am incensed about is, this is just another wedge with which to introduce more restrictions on an already over-regulated country.
And before anyone suggests that I or AC should move to another country, stop and think how much rights do you still hold in this country; the country of your birth.
The country where YOU are supposed to decide YOUR fate, whether it's speed limits or freedom of speech.
Like AC, I can say for a fact that we have lost control of our country to some invisible filthy evil scum bags some years ago, and no-one has given a dam.
I for one do not even want the 40kmh rule around schools.
I differ from most people in that, life is dangerous, teach your children to be aware of the dangers, and not expect everyone else to change their life to accommodate those too lazy, ignorant or plain stupid to know better.
And Paul, please stop it with your boorish, and self righteous platitudes, you may think that slowing down around schools is a great idea, then tell you what, YOU DO IT, and let us get on with our lives.
Only fools believe that this UN idea is a good one.
By shifting the responsibility from the parent/child, to the driver, you are creating an even greater chance of death/injury.

Stuff climate change
Stuff the gay agenda
Stuff immigrant quotas
Stuff international treaties
Stuff plant based diets and soy drinks
Stuff feminism
Stuff university graduates
Stuff sellout politicians
Stuff white guilt
Stuff multiculturalism
Stuff globalism
Stuff carbon reduction
Stuff political correctness
Stuff religious discrimination
Stuff the UN
Stuff unelected beaurecrats
Stuff diversity quotas
Stuff censorship
Stuff electric cars
Stuff toxic masculinity

Armchair Critic, if the elites & these useful idiots that support this rubbish get their way, you won’t be paying rego too much longer.

The useful idiots can’t see this is just another step towards removing private vehicle ownership from peasants like us & them.

The select committee on global warming of the UK parliament let the cat out of the bag recently when in the joint statement they said that the private ownership of motor cars was not compatible with the necessary reduction of [the wonder gas] CO2.

The elites can’t stand the thought of us peasants having private cars wasted on us.

Paul, I never said it was a universal limit, nor implied it.
You asked the question about the school limits.
That is your technique again, ask about something not implied or proposed.

Stuff climate change: Hmmm I think it has run its race
Stuff the gay agenda: Another trendy waffle
Stuff immigrant quotas: Emigrant quotas needed.
Stuff international treaties; must have some,electromagnetic spectrum
Stuff plant based diets and soy drinks; Use Soy milk to keep Cholesterol down.
Stuff feminism: Has become exagerated
Stuff university graduates: My experience totally useless
Stuff sellout politicians: Vote them out
Stuff white guilt: Don't have any
Stuff multiculturalism; Boo
Stuff globalism: Had its day
Stuff carbon reduction: Ha Ha Ha, how to close volcanoes ?
Stuff political correctness: Exercise of fools
Stuff religious discrimination: Sad really
Stuff the UN: Been taken over now UIN
Stuff unelected beaurecrats: Like death & taxes
Stuff diversity quotas: Are discriminatory
Stuff censorship : Tool of the worried
Stuff electric cars; Give me the money I'll have one tomorrow
Stuff toxic masculinity: Not enough to go around, should be rationed

The good old blood and guts brigade are beside themselves. They are STUFFING everything insight, except the Xmas Turkey! I can just imagine a gathering of these wise old geriatrics on the verandah of the 'Shady Rest Retirement Village'.

Someone would say "I want to stuff Climate Change!", another "I want to stuff the UN!", then another "I want to stuff multiculturalism!" and finally Old Fart Fred..."I want to stuff GAYS"...The stares of amazement at Fred from the gathered throng of old farts.... One old fart to another; "I always had my doubts about that Old Fart Fred!"

30 kph somehow means 40 kph if people would do what the speed limit says. I say they have the 30 kph limit right. People can not understand what 40 kph limit at school times are some how taken to mean 50 kph.

Riely, so it seems you too believe that a child/person cannot be killed by a vehicle moving at 30kmh.
This is just another fruitless attempt at band-aid politics, which is;
As long as we are seen to be doing 'something', we are doing good.
Rubbish, and why?
Because instead of making the hard decisions, the correct decisions, the un-popular decisions, let's take the EASY way out, and make it appear we are being proactive and fixing problems.
Any law or action which diminishes the responsibility, or shifts the responsibility, from the offender to the offended, is simply a gutless way to shift blame/responsibility.
I totally reject the notion that I should 'be responsible for another persons ignorance or shortcomings.
What is clearly a fools idea of a good idea, is that instead of educating your children to be better, more aware and responsible people, NO let's shift any blame or fault onto completely innocent and unaware strangers.
By making these pathetically unrealistic and unjust laws, they are in and of themselves killing children.
Unless and until, even cars and cyclists, are separated, no end of speed limits will stop deaths/injuries.
The key word here is 'speed', not 'high speed', but any form of motion and therefore collision between human and machine will result in, injury, sometimes death.
Children running across the road from between parked cars, is just one of many things they should be educated about.
There are too many more to mention here.
NO!
As cruel as it sounds, if it's good enough for your child to die from a mis-adventure whilst on holidays, it is equally reasonable that without appropriate supervision or education, we can expect deaths and injuries from the collision between a child and a vehicle doing even 30kmh.
So I tell those of you who agree with this stupid 30kmh proposal, stop shifting the fault/blame away from the guilty and onto the innocent.
It is not the fault of a driver if a child ignorantly puts him in an untenable situation, and in so doing cause the innocent to be vilified and aggrieved

Hasbeen,

I agree that there are moves to stop the plebs from owning cars.

However, the arrogant elites haven't reckoned with China which, if it isn't already, will soon be the world's leading motor vehicle manufacturer, flogging cars priced well below those built in the West. China will have the West so far over the barrel that they will not be able to stop imports of Chinese cars, and they will have to allow their citizens to buy them.

All this UN waffle is just so much bullshite. The mighty dollar - and China - call the tune

ALTRAV,
For decades it was thought that having well defined roads, with vehicles on them and pedestrians off them, was the best way to improve road safety. But that sort of environment results in drivers going faster yet paying less attention to their surroundings. And pedestrians still needed to cross the roads.

It was eventually realised that in some situations, a more effective way of improving road safety was to design the roads to make motorists pay more attention to their surroundings.

It's not about assigning blame; it's about making our roads safer. And it's not about what happens when a collision occurs at the speed limit; it's about getting vehicles to be able to stop quickly enough to avoid collisions (or at the very least, to minimise their effects).

Aiden, it's your kind of convoluted thinking that has been at the fore of these stupid, insipid and ultimately, dangerous laws and decisions.
Yours is not the type of mindset that should be debating/discussing issues such as this.
It is your type of thinking that got us here in the first place.
You cannot be so twisted as to not apportion the blame to those who are at fault, (and yes, if that means the children, and ultimately, the parents, so be it) on those completely detached from fault or blame.
Let me educate you and give you one of life's lessons.
A road going vehicle is designed to be on the road.
An off-road vehicle is designed to go off-road.
A pedestrian or a cyclist, is NOT designed to go on the road.
So if a person wishing to set foot on a road, which is supporting vehicles doing what they are designed to do, then the onus is on the pedestrian to be aware of his surroundings, NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND!
Pedestrians on any road is as serious an infringement as vehicles on pathways or pedestrian walkways.
Also the case for cyclists, they should also be on pathways or backstreets, not on major arteries.
Just because some annoying minorities make nuisances of themselves and even have friends in high places, does not mean inconveniencing the majority of the population to succumb to the selfishness and arrogance of a very stupid and self indulgent minority.

Paul1405,

You are so right in your description of the usual suspects.

Only one question: What planet do you think they are from?

Pedestrians have to cross roads. But, cyclists travelling on roads with motor vehicles are risking death everytime they pedal along so-called lanes separated from cars and huge trucks by a painted line. There is no other suitable description for anyone who rides a bike on a roadway but 'stupid'. If they want to risk their own lives, that's their business; but causing inconvenience and stress to motorists is a huge liberty. In SA, cyclists are now allowed to ride on footpaths,where they are a menace to pedestrians. Bikes should be collected for scrap. If you don't drive, take public transport, taxis - or walk. Mobility scooters should be governed to 4 kph or whatever walking speed is. They are also a menace to pedestrians.

Hey Bazz
My 'Stuff it' list was quickly thought out and off the top of my head.
In hindsight I too thought I was wrong on the 'Stuff electric cars' issue.
After already posting the comment I thought it seemed like the odd one out.

I'm not necessarily opposed to better ideas if they have a basis of merit.
- And obviously if we can power our cars from energy derived from the sun;
Then it makes a lot more sense to do that than burn millions of barrels of oil a day.

I also thought I should've added 'Trangender toilets', 'No-go Zones' and 'Global Governance' to the list.

Sometimes I feel like its a bit of a battle to clarify everything against this whole pc narrative.
For example, when I said 'Stuff multiculturalism', that shouldn't necessarily equate to 'I hate foreigners'.
It's this whole top down politics that's conditioned you to think this way.
By top-down politics, I'm alluding to the way that domestic policies are now dictated by international policies
Instead of the citizens of each nation deciding their own policies, and their representatives representing their interests in the international policy arena.
Now the international policies decide the narrative, and politicians just dance to the tune, and sell it to their citizens

Your probably conditioned to think I must be racist by the 'Stuff multiculturalism' statement, but in truth I don't hate foreigners.
I support them having their culture (In their own countries) in exactly the same way I support Australians having our own culture
What I hate is the narrative that says 'international politics' dictates 'national politics'
That immigrants are the majority voice and existing citizens are all racist if they dare complain about anything at all...

And what I hate is the 'narrative' behind all of these issues,
That if anyone doesn't follow the narrative, their opinions are dismissed and excluded as not having any basis of merit.

It felt good to write and share that list.
Like washing all this pc crap off myself and feeling clean and well grounded again.

ttbn,

Have you got a governor on your mobility scooter?

ttbn, I differ slightly from your take.
I don't wish to disagree with you but, my position is that if a pedestrian and a cyclist have a collision, the most that will happen is physical injury whether minor or worse.
BUT, if a car and a pedestrian or a cyclist collide, I guarantee you that the worst that will happen is death!
Now if I realise this obvious fact, why is it that those empowered with the responsibility of making decisions to keep us all safe, did not figure this obvious one out for themselves, that they needed someone on OLO to figure it out for them?
As much as I hate the fact that WE have to go out of OUR way (literally) to accommodate something which is CLEARLY WRONG to begin with, only adds to our angst.
And I wish everyone would stop flapping on about public transport.
I for one hate, loath, generally wish it dead.
The so called public transport, never goes where YOU want to go, and it never goes WHEN you want to go.
So if you have nothing to do all day, and you don't want to go, when you need to go, I would suggest public transport, otherwise, do as my wife and I do, when we're bored, we get an all-day pass and ride the various "rides" available, road, rail and water, for a day out, and a meal along the way.
Now THAT's what public transport is good for, a leisurely day out and about.
So those of you too brainwashed to know the difference, you're most welcome to keep plebbing along with PT, whilst the rest of us will keep using our more comfortable and extremely versatile and accessible, cars, which are available instantly, at your doorstep, and will take you comfortably to your exact destination, not somewhere near it.

Driving schools don't appear to focus on the mentality of the student hence the many morons behind the wheel.

Indi, slightly off topic, but one thing I have been quite vocal about, has been, the 'driving schools'.
They focus on teaching all manner of driving according to the law and what it expects of someone if they are granted a 'drivers license'.
I am angered at the fact that whilst these instructors are focused on the legal aspects of driving, they completely avoid the actual reality of what they are doing under their very noses.
They completely miss teaching them about how to drive, a 'CAR'!
I am continually angered by these maggots on 'P' plates, driving 'up my arse', and treating the car like they treat their enemies.
As soon as they see a gap, barely big enough to fit their car, they pull out and come flying past, as if their car was on fire.
At other times you see them flying past anyway, well over the speed limit, again as if they are more important than everyone else on the road.
The speed 'LIMIT', is exactly that; A LIMIT!
Then you end up along side them or behind them at the next set of lights.
They accelerate off the lights as if they are on a race track, they come screaming up to a stop and apply the brakes extremely hard and late.
The list goes on, and it is these maggots who are the problem, too busy being full of themselves and completely un-aware of their surroundings.
Again they are always the ones trying to pass you in a school zone, because they are so important, and the law does not apply to them.
They must learn that it's OK to travel at 2 or 3kmh under the speed 'LIMIT', because it is a LIMIT!
And learn to be more respectful to the car itself and the others on the road.
The message, in a nutshell: SLOW DOWN!

ArmChair, My response was completely tongue in cheek.
You will have observed that when someone in public says almost
anything there is a herd reaction of abuse of something not implied
but can with some imagination be a cause of offense.
Then hundreds if not thousands will all take up the cry.
Well here on OLO we have a couple of the same breed.
No need for names they are obvious.
Re EVs, I have driven two, a Mitsubishi and a Nissan Leaf.
They are different but very pleasant to drive. Unfortunately it was
only short drives so no extensive experience.
The price is high and I think the dealers are trying to get their
service charges at sale time as there is nothing in it for them on service.
Re international dictates domestic. Just read an article about that
idea is over from now and the country will be the centre of attention.

The "enlightened ones" who are all telling us what we must do and by
when are staring down the barrel of a few shocks.

ALTRAV,

I walk a fair bit, and I have to say that I'm concerned about any injuries that could be caused to me by some idiot riding a bike on the footpath. And, if I am injured, I have no way of identifying with certainty the idiot. In the name of self-preservation, I do walk to the left all the time. Then of course I am subjected to multi-cultis who don't know about the convention of keeping left on a footpath. A total ban on bikes is the way to go. Along with the multi-cultis :).

Ha ttbn, you touched on my pet hate, those who insist on walking to the right.
Largely in shopping centres it is common, I simply say keep left and
just stand there. One replied "There is no rule !"
My response is "Yes there is ! Haven't you noticed ?"
Remember the yellow line down the middle of the footpath in Sydney ?
In the UK they walk to the right. If you don't you are endlessly
having to move over.
There is one particular group here that really try hard to walk to the right.

All of which reminds me of a discussion I had with a German about cars
and which side of the road. He asked about standardising world wide
and that Britain, India Asia etc should change. My reply was "well
you lot changed to the right on Napoleons order we will wait for you
to change back !"

The discussion then went to history, I asked him if he was right handed,
Yes he said, "On what side would you wear a sword ?" I asked.
On the left was the reply, why I asked "so I would not fight across
the saddle. Then as you approached a stranger (highwayman?) on a road
Which side of the road would you keep to ?
And that is why we drive on the left !

CHANGE:

Change: sox and under ware
Change: climate
Change: trains busses and ferries
Change: short
Change: left to right
Change: partners and dance
Change: ling, Clint Eastwood
Change: small
Change: Cool
Change: Government
Change: for the sake of it
Change: times are-a (ing) :-)

Dan

ttbn, I don't mind the idea of totally banning bikes, although with all these "Tour-de France" aspirants, I would not hold my breath.
Have you noticed the increase in cyclists every year about the time the "Tour" is on.
What a bunch of morons.
Anyway, if pedestrians feel insecure with these morons playing Russian roulette with them I can understand and empathise.
The authorities must be made to understand that the three mediums are incompatible with each other.
The only logical solution is to remove the bikes from major arteries and making them use secondary roads.
To take a very simplistic view, need I remind the lawmakers that it is called a FOOT-PATH, not a foot and bike path.
But given the choice of life and death, I would imagine that any incident between a person and a bike, compared to a bike and a car, I know which is the lesser of the two evils.
So let's at least, start by getting the bikes off the main roads and onto the back streets, they can still travel at their optimum speed, but much safer as back streets are not frequented by as many cars as main roads.

"The good old blood and guts brigade are beside themselves. They are STUFFING everything insight, except the Xmas Turkey!"

I liked your turkey jokes.
The best thing about being Aussie is being able to have a joke and a laugh, and take the mickey out of others in a nice friendly Aussie way.
This 'taking the piss' takes precedence in real Australian culture, which is slowly fading.
It put an end to all the endless silly squabbles and put us all back on an even footing.
I sometimes wonder whether the 'taking the piss' culture was far better and more well-refined a system than all of this PC crap.
Whether our racist hazing of foreigners was really any more than an initiation to Australian culture and becoming an Aussie.

And as for being an Aussie:
- It's not until you tell everyone to go and get stuffed, and then give them all the finger that you truly become one.
(thongs and t-shirt also required)

Bazz,

I always stand my ground and make them walk around me. However, the last time it occurred, when an Asian woman got between me and a wall on my left and I stopped and she stopped and ushered me past (she was polite, just didn’t know the rule) I couldn’t very well say anything as my own wife was intently plodding along on the right! She doesn’t take much notice of me, either.

ALTRAV,

Yeah. It’s a nightmare when all the tragics get out the bikes that they haven’t ridden for 12 months when the Tour Down Under is on in SA

Dan, most sensible thing you have said !

Hi Mr O,

Not to sure what planet the usual suspects are on, as they tend to be up in the clouds most of the time. I do suspect they hitched a ride to Earth on a passing space ship from the planet Grump, which orbits out there in the cosmos somewhere to the far right of Pluto, that was about 100 years ago for most of them. The planet Grump is populated by Grumps, crusty old white male Anglo farts, they band sheila's farts, and young farts (anyone under 80) about 150 years ago, and wound back the clock to the permanent date and time of 11am 25th July 1897, where it has remained ever since, hence the Grumps are caught in a perpetual time warp. The Grumps did away with education, as they decided they knew everything there was to know, and intelligent people are just dummies, hence their string of "intelligent" post on the forum, everything from climate change to speed limits.
The good news Mr O is we were able to confine these space aligns to the 'Shady Rest Retirement Village' where they while away their hours playing Parcheesi,Bingo and take turns posting nonsense on OLO with Nursies computer when she's not looking.

Paul, time to wake up.
You have been dreaming and decided to post your dream, right?
It appears that your dream was really about yourself, because how could you know what any old farts would be doing inside The Shady Rest Retirement Village.
Especially when you describe in such detail, the Parcheesi and bingo.
Ah well at least we now know where your getting a lot of your info from.
It's OK Paul, we understand, I suggest we all go a little easier on you in future, you sound a little frail.
Stiff upper lip, old chap, onward and upward, there's a good lad.

Happy NEW YEAR to one and all! Life a' laugh ALTIE me old cock, glad you have some humour in you still. We shall joust again in 2020!

Today's dump! Forget the old farts in horseless carriages, the big danger in life is old farts driving those mini motorised golf carts in shopping centres! BAN THEM I SAY! Those with zimmar frames are bad enough, they are also a danger to the public, but those on carts are a menace, a real danger to life and limb, in fact a real danger to society speeding around at 100 miles and hour!

Its good to see the forum old farts, travelling in the "Shady Rest' micro bus, driven by Chief Commander Hassy at 150km/hr every Tuesday afternoon as they make their weekly sojourn to the local shops to buy hair restorer and a bag of soft 'jelly babies' on account they have no teeth. Good onya fellas!

Alkatras Is a typical that can not and will not follow the written word. What does 100 kph mean to you. Let me guess 110. I have a dash cam on my side mirror that records me my speed and position and it records vehicles and trucks that pass me on my daily drive to a property 75 kms away and is passed on to the local police with thanks. I am sorry if that offends you but the laws are written.

Paul, I know what you mean about the "gophers".
I don't think I could do without my "fleet" though.
I can't walk too far without the onslaught of excruciating pain from the lower back and every joint below that.
Even standing for too long brings on the same results.
I must admit that I have witnessed some very inconsiderate people on gophers, and I cringe, as they are setting a bad example for the rest of us, and that usually means that after enough people get pissed off they start complaining to people who have the power to make laws, and the merry-go-round starts up all over again.
I can happily say that I have set up a dedicated van, an ex-taxi, for the mobility impaired, a Toyota Commuter van, some years ago, and because I have a few gophers, both three and four wheelers, and even one that comes apart, for ease of carrying in a domestic normal car, I have given myself the best options by being able to choose the appropriate gopher for the occasion.
I could not do without them now.
I get around normally like anyone else, but distance, standing too long and, oh yes, stairs, forget it, the pain, and it takes me forever.
Every trip out is a planning mission in itself.
How far from the car park is it?
Are there any stairs or lifts?
Do I have to wait in line at all?
And so it goes on.
Anyway, Paul and all, all the best for the season and of course, all the best for a happy (and healthy) new year and beyond.

Hi ALTIE, Sorry to hear about that back pain, nothing worse than suffering from that kind of pain. The only bright thought I can offer is "I hope it is the result of shaggers back and not an accident, and you got mountains of pleasure getting it.

You"ll like this one, good for comment. I recall, a few years back our moko (sort of grandchild) aged about 3 or 4 was knocked down in a busy 'Westfields' outside a supermarket by another child, a bit older, pushing the family shopping trolley uncontrolled, full of groceries out of the shop and straight into our child, cut lip, crying and bruising for ours. The mother of the child which did the damage only offered a "sorry" before quickly disappearing and refusing to give any details, saying aggressively to our niece "you're kidding, bad luck". Niece reported it to both the Supermarket and Westfields management, who were equally uninterested.

Riely, old chap, I hate to burst your bubble but if you were not attempting humour with your last comment on handing over video evidence of speeding or recalcitrant motorists, I'm afraid that unless you are a sworn member of the law enforcement in your area or state, your video is more than likely not even touched.
Surely you understand the gravity, implications and ramifications of the action you describe.
The system cannot act on a public complaint without due diligence.
It cannot also simply take the word of a consumer without some kind of official recognition or standing.
So unless you are an official or sworn, officer of the law, I can't see them taking your or your camera's word for anything you may present.
I had to get my camera and myself checked out or assessed for eligibility, by the shire, just to take photo's of illegally parked cars in our street.
Even then they told me that they were not obligated, by law, to follow up on the complaint, even though it contravened the road traffic act, and legally it was a police matter, you know, like speeding and things that are the jurisdiction of the police more so than the shire.
Even though they authorised me, they preferred I call the parking dept and they were legally allowed to photograph and fine the offender/s.
Anyway, I thought it was illegal to take pics, stills or movies, of anyone without their consent?
In my case the camera had to be a certain kind with a date and time clearly displayed in the picture, and because it was not vague or ambiguous, there was no mistaking the vehicle and it's breaking the law.
Not withstanding your bona-fides, not only you would have to be approved, but also your camera would have to be an appropriate, approved one according to the specs and requirements required by the system, which usually is specific to only the law enforcement who tendered for or requested the instrument available only to them.
Funny how the law of convenience applies when it suites.

I understand, with emphasis on understand, that it is legal to
photograph anyone or anything in a public place, including police.
Those dashcams that record video, gps data, speed, the driver seat
belt use, no phone etc are legal and are accepted as evidence of your
guilt or innocence.
The suggestion to jam the gps signal may be to your disadvantage.
To say nothing of that being illegal with penalties of 12 months.

I love people who just walk onto Pedestrian Crossings as if they have a right to expect traffic to instantly stop.

There is no privacy in public. Rear facing cameras work very well for obvious reasons.
Photo evidence is very well received and yes it does have gps, speed, time and date, and in colour. The lens is separated from the recorder with a mini sd. Great investment for public minded persons.
Police are always calling for dash cam evidence of collisions or red light runners. You need to get yourself one.

Bazz, as I said, different states, different laws, unfortunately it causes no end of trouble and egregious expense.
Spare a thought for the poor trucky or East/West drivers.
Issy, oh I love them, and then you have to sit there while they go into a raving rant frenzy, along with all the expletives.
I got out of the car to shirt front this Richard cranium once, many years ago.
He ran away.
Go figure?
For those of you who suffer negative emotions at the thought or sight of someone driving a Rolls or Bentley, DON'T!
Years ago this drunken, possibly homeless guy, stumbles onto the road, I'm driving one of my Rollers, had to brake very hard and quick to avoid hitting him.
In hindsight, I wish I had.
As he's slowly making his way across the road directly in front of me, he gets to the curb, turns around and spits at me/the car luckily it had no legs, so it never made it to the car.
I was that angry, as soon as I could turn around, I did, with the intent of bowling this piece of sh!t over.
In hindsight, it was lucky for me, he disappeared down some alley or hole or whatever.
So yes, it has always amazed me as to the mentality and cognisant ability of the lawmakers, when they politicise laws instead of using logic.
I've always maintained and still stand by the belief that, the road is for cars, and cars take priority whilst on them.
Footpaths are for people and any other form of mobility and so the people are the priority, and cars give way to them.
That not only seems fair, but also logical.

Altrav,

There is some hope, but not much.

From the NSW Rules for Pedestrians

"236
Pedestrians not to cause a traffic hazard or obstruction
(1) A pedestrian must not cause a traffic hazard by moving into the path of a driver.
Maximum penalty—20 penalty units."

I've driven a few Rolls over the years, once drove a twenty's Phantom 1 tourer from Sydney to Melbourne on a delivery trip, marvellous car and top gear all the way, except for one or two hills when I selected third as a precaution

I regularly drive a London-Edinborough model in India when I visit my Muslim Mate, his father was a sporting driver and bought it in the twenties from another Maharajah.
My mate keeps it for me to use, so in a way it's "My Car"!!

Issy, good for you, and lucky you!

Come on Paul, now you are getting insulting.

150km/hr indeed. I don't use those puny European things, it is MILES/hour, & miles only for me.

The last time I was knowingly timed it was only 130 Miles/Hour down Conrod in the Holden Dealers Team Monaro in 1968.

A little earlier that year it was 180 Miles/Hour over the same flying eighth in the Formula 1 Brabham Repco.

Having driven some real cars, I'm not interested in driving a bit over the road speed limits, I just want to be allowed to make reasonable progress, however Kilometers/Hour humph, beneath my dignity.

Sorry Hassy, I mean to say 150 miles/hr, please forgive me old cock! I was a bit of a fan of motor sport in those days myself, more the old Sydney Showground Speedway on a Saturday night. Plenty of spills and thrills there, and not just on the track. Motor bikes with sidecars was a real crowd favourite.

Has anyone ever done an emission count on motorsport ? I'd imagine it'd be up there with the worst of entertainment pollution !

Motor spot doesn't come anywhere near football etc., as a generator of pollution.

I never saw saw hundreds of tones of carcinogen shot into the sky at a race meeting, the way they are at some football matches matches, or the way they were just a couple of nights back with new years eve fireworks.

All those pretty colours are generated by some very nasty chemicals or metals, & the stupidity is promoted so 10s of thousands travel a long way to get their lungs filled with the stuff. Bush fire smoke has nothing on that stuff.

Our ridiculous authorities attack people smoking a small stick of tobacco, but spend millions filling the sky with hundreds of tons of carcinogens for fun.

ALTRAV,
Apportioning blame to those who are at fault for an accident is no substitute for preventing it from occurring in the first place. Assigning blame won't prevent a tragedy from repeating. You can assign blame all you like, but it's an extremely poor basis for decision making.

Your claim that "the onus is on the pedestrian to be aware of his surroundings, NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND!" is stupid. Both should be aware of their surroundings. But motorists have a far greater need to be aware of their surroundings because vehicles are heavier, take longer to stop, and can cause far more damage.

And legally, most roads are as much for cyclists as they are for cars. The road hogs who fail to recognise this should not be allowed to drive!

Getting back to my earlier point, roads designed to make drivers more attentive have been well studied, and found to be safer than conventional roads.

Unlike you I have studied Road Safety Engineering at Uni, so I do know quite a lot about it. But I guess you think that disqualifies me, and that the type of mindset that should be discussing this (and indeed making the decisions) is one that never challenges its own assumptions and ignores the actual data!

Aidan,

As one who has studied Road Traffic Engineering would you say that the relevant authorities are remiss when they allow the broken centre line to go around blind corners, through blind dips and over blind crests?

These abound on NSW roads and have undoubtedly contributed to the road toll.

What adds insult to possible injury is that they repeatedly remark these dangerous and potentially life taking markings.

A whole discussion on cars ................. this is where Hasbeen, ttbn, individual, mhaze, Bazz, and all of the other usual suspect get to strut their stuff. This is where they really excel.

I just can't wait until they start discussing football, barbeques, and guns. It doesn't get any better. All makes sense now why they like excluding educated and smart people from their discussions.

Issy,

"Motor spot doesn't come anywhere near football etc., as a generator of pollution."

Being an evidence based old cock as you are, always demanding links etc from others, including me, how about the evidence Issy to back up your claim, a link will do, tonnes/hours or what ever they measure pollution of that kind in at footy matches.
Football, your finding, is that restricted to the round ball only, or do you have stats across all codes of football. I'm very interested in your evidence. I'll keep calling for it until you provide such evidence. Otherwise you earn your first PORKY AWARD for 2020.

discussing football,
Mr Opinion,
now you're becoming offensive linking me with that mugs game !

Paul,

"Motor spot doesn't come anywhere near football etc., as a generator of pollution."

Simply because it doesn't generate the same number of spectators, very many of whom drive their cars or use other methods of pollution generating travel.

The predecessors of the Greens tried way back in the 1970s to push for a curb on motor sport because of the pollution and the answer was the same back then, football caused more pollution.

No references needed, just use common sense.

When I was motor racing most meetings attracted no more than 10,000 spectators. A Sheffield shield cricket match, which attracts 5 people & a dog today, would have 20,000 for each of 5 days. Which burnt more fuel?

Unless mine was the feature class for the meeting, I would burn no more than 7 gallons of ave gas for the weekend. Even if mine was the major event I would burn no more than 12 gallons.

What a big deal. The people at Bondi & Manly beaches would have burnt more getting to the beach than the average motor race meeting & the spectators.

Aidan, aportioning blame for an accident to those at fault is meant to do exactly that, so they hopefully have learned a valuable life/driving lesson, hopefully never to be repeated again.
What the hell are you?
Some kind of PC freak!
It is the ONLY base for decision making.
You studied what at uni?
If this is the type of insipid resolve taught at uni, you have just confirmed what we have always suspected, anything you may wish to say hence forth will be considered moot.
Now let ME educate you, not some academic loser who probably catches public transport or rides a bike to uni.
A driver must always be vigilant, not only because he is driving a two tonne structure at a speed which cannot be arrested easily or quickly.
Given that, his responsibility is on the road and what happens ON THE ROAD.
It is not the drivers responsibility to look at pedestrians as well, until they give him cause to notice them.
You cannot be so stupid as to expect, with all the things a driver has to do, to also look at what's happening on the footpath.
You have an attitude problem that reveals an emotional side to you, which in turn means you are incapable of pragmatic and objective decisions and conclusions.
So much for your time at uni if this is typical of your thoughts on this topic.
You really are out of it, when you call road users 'road hogs'.
For your information, I have more smarts on the subject than you and your stupid lecturer put together.
For example, who was the classic supreme idiot who decided to mix cars, and on major arteries, with cyclists.
Fools the lot of you, because the speeds are incompatible.
What should have happened is the cyclists should have been relegated to back streets, and in lieu of, footpaths.
You can shove your DATA, I work with actuals and the real world.
OH, and BTW, now I know who we can partly blame for, at least some of the road deaths/tolls in this country.

Issy, I have read your defence for not providing evidence that football is a greater generator of pollution than motor sport.
Unfortunately after hours of thoughtful consideration of your defence....Nah, The black cap goes on the head, and your are awarded a PORKY MEDAL second class, for that one. Wear it with pride, your first for 2020. I am sure you will earn lots more in the year to come!

Is Mise,
My experience of NSW roads is rather limited, but from what you're saying it sounds like they're very remiss.

What surprised me most about NSW roads is how many wide roads lacked medians and pocket lanes.

ALTRAV,
Everyone has an emotional side, but mine doesn't prevent rational thought. Yours clearly does - you think you're an expert but you're really just an ignoramus who wilfully ignores the real world data because he thinks his delusions equate to the real world!

Apportioning blame in the hope that someone learns a valuable lesson is of little importance AFAIC. I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, but preventing the crash from happening in the first place is far more valuable. The idea that assigning blame is the ONLY base for decision making would be regarded as absurd by any engineer - engineers look at what can go wrong, what can prevent it from going wrong, and what can mitigate the consequences when something does go wrong.

What's most effective at preventing accidents varies from road to road. But limiting drivers' situational awareness to what's on the road is often undesirable from a safety perspective. And there are circumstances where designing the environment to make drivers more vigilant is the most effective way to reduce the number of accidents.

As for calling me a PC freak: them thar's fightin' words!

And it's not road users in general I call "road hogs" - it's those who don't recognise that cyclists have as much legal right to use the roads as they do. And they always have: they've been using those arteries since before cars dd. But now cycle lanes are being created so that cyclists don't have to mix with general traffic so much.

BTW I studied Civil Engineering and Transport Systems Engineering at uni, and my Road Safety Engineering lecturer usually drove to work.

Paul,

If you can't see it then that's your problem not mine,I cannot give a reference to the campaign of the Green's predecessors as there was no Internet back then, but I was there and spoke out against the idea of banning/curtailing motor sport, you might ask the former Greens MP Ian Cohen for he was there as well.

Just to divert the thread a little here is a sequence of announcements
that I have noticed over the last say, five years.
I might be being super sensitive but it does ring some bells.

Actually I suspect that there has been an arrangement between oil
companies and motor manufacturers. Note the time sequence:
Shell & BP announce they are planning on how to get out of the oil industry;
Some car manufactures make serious entry to electric car market, Nissan and Mitsubishi.
Shell announces that chargers will be installed at every Shell station world wide.
Tesla announces major expansion of production facilities.
Next step almost all car manufacturers announce electric programs.
Electric generation industry scrambling for guidance and policy direction.

Now I may be imagining all this but I think the sequence is prethought out.
The oil industry may realise they cannot supply fuel for the existing
vehicle population plus the expected increase. So they started discussions with the car builders.

Many think there is an endless supply of oil but they should examine
what is happening in the tight oil industry. Financially not good and
the cost of exploration and development is excessive for all fields.

Here is a link to a report that might shed some light on Shell's thinking.

http://tinyurl.com/rm6deq2

There you are Josephus, how much better than a 1/2 page of url.

As I said, any comments or opinions you have are moot.
I will never-the-less correct you at every turn.
I am an expert because my life and career has been about designing, building and the dynamics of ALL forms of vehicles, including cars, and with focus, emphasis, specialising in CARS.
To explain it at your level of intellect; my life has been about auto design/engineering.
I come under the banner of industrial designer, specialising in cars.
In other words, I take something from the non-dimensional, (think up ideas), then create it into a three dimensional structure, (create the proto-type), then test and develop it. Then on through to production, if that is the clients wishes.
So that you know, my life has been all about cars and driving, and I am an expert because my knowledge came naturally, experienced, I did not do something I knew nothing about and everything I now know about it, I had to learn.
The ignoramus here is you, who, like all academics think you know what your talking about, when you knew absolutely nothing only a few years before going to uni, and now you claim expertise.
Remember the word expert derives from the word experience.
Where is your experience?
Let this expert enlighten you further.
I am part of a very exclusive club, that at 69 years of age can brag about NEVER having had, what is commonly called, an ACCIDENT!
I don't know your age, but can you say that?
I have too much respect for the motor car, to see IT harmed in ANY way.
So I drive for concern of the car, not the public.
If people are too stupid or high on something or not focusing on their immediate environment, guess what, in nature they would be dead.
So I don't care what stupid rubbish YOU think you've learned from uni, it is worthless, you can't save fools from themselves.
It is a fact of life and nature, people must die, yes MUST, because they are mere mortals and subject to the foibles of their own shortcomings and lackings.

my life has been about auto design/engineering.
ALTRAV,
I have always wondered why you people have never designed governors for cars so as to not allow the driver to exceed the recommended speed limits ?
Why aren't cars designed with the foresight that morons will be driving them ?
Perhaps it can be done very soon because it's desperately needed for the safety of all !

Indy, good point and a valid question at that.
I can answer that because it came up as a think tank question decades ago and it appeared again every now and then.
The reason we cannot have governors on our engines is because we must not remove the flexibility and control of the vehicle from the driver.
For example, I'm sure you have at some time over the years found yourself in a situation where the car is constrained by the load it is carrying or towing, so that it inhibits it's performance or in lay terms, renders the car unable to reach it's full speed potential.
This has been the cause of too many deaths and incidents where one begins to pass a vehicle, mostly articulated ones, (semi trailers)
and realise all too late that it will not go fast enough to pass this vehicle in front, before encountering on-coming traffic.
Of course, you back off the throttle and slip back in behind the vehicle you were attempting to pass.
Unfortunately sometimes it does not happen quick enough, and so we end up with injuries and or fatalities.
A governor would only exacerbate this problem, as it will also stop you from accelerating further and passing thereby getting past quicker, even if it meant (which it does, more often than not) breaking the speed limit.
Cruise control is not a governor, it is a "hold" at a set speed device, which the driver can dis-engage several ways, in an instant if he feels the need.
He is still in control.

See ,
car advice.com.au

"You might not have heard, but the Europeans have recently started the process of introducing built-in, mandatory speed limiters in all new cars sold by 2022. That’s a mere three years away, and if it becomes law (extremely likely), there will be no doubt that Australia will follow suit without a moment’s hesitation."

Governors/speed limiters have been and are fitted to motor vehicles since the first years of motor vehicles.

ALTRAV,
Seriously? You're suggesting safety objectives should be ignored just because nature is dangerous? Or that if people are killed it doesn't matter because they'd die eventually anyway?

While you can't save every fool from themselves, you can (and should) reduce the number impacted.

One of the features of being human is that length and quality of life matter. Another is that our greater communication ability means we don't have to rely on our own experience to learn; we can also learn from the experience of others.

I don't regard myself as an expert in traffic engineering or road design, but unlike you I do know a fair bit about it. And the proportion of what I know that comes from my own driving experiences is quite small.

As for whether I've had an accident, that depends what you mean. I've never been in a collision with another vehicle (though I've had a few misses) but back when I was on P plates I once damaged the car I was driving by snagging the bumper and headlight on a protruding pipe when reversing out of a parking space under a building.

http://www.speedlimiteraustralia.com.au

Here they are seen as a safety device among other attributes.

Aidan and others;

Anything that interferes with the driving or control of a motor vehicle is bad.
Firstly we MUST NOT put our lives in the hands of a machine, especially one that has AI ability.
Computers and electronics in general, are death traps.
With all the cars I have today, my wife and I will avoid buying a new car with today's technology.
The ones we have with only minor electronics or computer aids, are enough of a nuisance, with regards to reliability.
Whether speed limited or any device that takes over control of a land based vehicle is asking for trouble.
The amount of deaths that have already been caused by AI cars, is already at a level of concern, especially when it is supposed to be a system for saving lives.
I would rather make shocking comments now than have people in shock later when they lose a friend or family member, and it will happen.
Statistically we all know I am right, so don't get all high and mighty about me saying it.
Firstly, the level of competence by current drivers, especially the young maggots.
They are arrogant, self absorbed and extremely dangerous, and that's before they get IN the car.
Once they start the engine, well, watch out.
On the road, they are the ones right up your arse pushing you to go faster, I must remind these pieces of ....... that the wording is speed LIMIT, so I always travel at around 2kmh under the LIMIT.
Then as soon as there is enough room to squeeze out they fly out to pass, but then there's another guy in the other lane, also abiding by the law.
Then she sees a gap back in front of me which leaves approx 30cm of clearance between us as she darts back in front of me.
Leaving me vulnerable to ramming into her rear, which sounds much more appealing than it actually would be, because at that moment she has caused ME to be in breach of the "following too close" law, and therefore a possible fine.

Issy, that device is a death trap.
Keep well away from them.
The better alternative which cars like Ford and others adopted some years ago was the audio unit on the dashboard, which you could set at whatever speed you chose, and it's function was to give off a sound which alerted you to the fact you have just exceeded your selected speed limit.
Much better and universally accepted idea.
It meant that it left you in control of the car and simply 'advised' you rather than take control away from you.

Altrav,

You said,

"I can answer that because it came up as a think tank question decades ago and it appeared again every now and then.
The reason we cannot have governors on our engines is because we must not remove the flexibility and control of the vehicle from the driver"

Well that statement is wrong, there have been, as I said, governors on vehicles since the dawn of the motor age.

Issy, I did not disagree with you because I am aware of what you say, but as we can see the idea was relegated to industrial vehicles such as forklifts, for obvious reasons.
The idea was dropped very early in the motor cars development, as we see from historical records.
It was originally created because no-one was familiar with the early motor cars and were incorporated to limit the engine revs to not over-rev the engine and was even tried as a means to comply with the early laws requiring a man with a red flag to walk in front of a car.
From memory, I think these poor guys were in mortal danger if the driver did not/could not stop in time, as some of the early cars had abysmal brakes, and that is if they were adjusted correctly, as the early cars had a very demanding service regime.

Altrav,
Your distrust of computers is so illogical that I feel I'd better check: are you aware of the differences between PCs and safety critical computer systems?

Features like ESP make vehicles much safer, so I'm puzzled as to why you'd want to avoid using them - although AIUI there is normally a way to turn them off if you want.

Deaths in self driving cars was a very major concern even when the number that had occurred was zero. I don't think saving lives was the original point of them, but it was recognised that they wouldn't be widely accepted until they were a lot safer than conventional cars. And with all the R&D that's currently underway, it's only a matter of time before they are.

Aiden, I appreciate your attempts at trying to remove any doubts or concerns I may have regarding Artificial Intelligence.
But I have had enough to do with electronics and vehicles, both on and off road, on water, and in the sky.
And as much as I am not a computer or electronic friendly guy, I have come to distrust them.
Just one model of car, a very expensive car, had so many issues that the owner had to get rid of it.
The sunroof would suddenly shut or open, for no reason, the seat would suddenly reset itself for no reason.
And the list went on.
My brother just bought a new Jaguar EV, the one that looks like an SUV.
From the first day it started playing up.
It sometimes decided not to power up, (start).
It would stop at the most inconvenient of moments and places.
A few times, while waiting for the dealership to come to assist, he would check to see it's state as he had nothing to do but wait.
Low and behold, it powered up as if nothing had happened, and the list goes on.
The cat had been back seven times in the first, (less than a) month.
This one cost $161,000.
I expect perfect reliability from a $161,000 car.
The problem was, of course, electronics, computers, and so on.
I certainly will not entertain a "fly-by-wire-car", that much I can guarantee you now.

To add to what I wrote earlier on arrangements between oil companies
and motor manufacturers re electric cars, this is a recent news item
in the oil publication http://tinyurl.com/thmwmso

$200 billion in shale debt due in next four years. Roughly $200
billion in North American oil and gas debt will mature in the next
four years, according to the Wall Street Journal, which includes $41
billion due this year. More than 200 companies have already filed for
bankruptcy since 2015, but that number will continue to rise as
drillers struggle amid the crushing weight of debt. The huge
obligations will force drillers to cut spending, potentially bringing
the shale boom to a halt.

The affect on US oil buying will be a big increase in their buying on
the world market. The tight oil (fracking) industry has not got under
way in Australia because of economic reality. Just so you are aware.

Altrav,
One of the early problems with car electronics was
Radio Frequency interference.
There are a multitude of incidents and it took a while for Bosch and
others to be instructed on what they needed to do.
One interesting case, I was driving up the road from Austria to Berlin
and noticed these wires across the road about every 3 metres.
I asked a local what they were about.
To the left was Radio Free Europe, 100KW plus and to the right was
Czechoslovakia. The German NRMA had to station tow trucks at each
end of the section to tow the newer cars through the beam.
The wires were there as a partial Faraday Shield.

Another incident, a car alongside transmitted on HF and the car next
to it would speed up or stop. That was in the US.
These days new designs are put into very high intensity fields to
confirm no problems but it has not been a complete success as they test at UHF.
A common Australian fault on Holdens was the blinkers would start a rapid flashing.
Also transmitting would set radar detectors beeping.

A very useful fault was at the toll gates on the harbour bridge,
As you get to the toll gate and were expected to put the coins in the
basket, you press the transmit button and the light went green and the gate rose.
Taxi drivers were also a wake up to it.
There are a multitude of stories like that.

Bazz, thanks for that.
Now that's what I'm talking about, some truths.
I have always wondered about the link between EMR and cancer.
I don't recall the word cancer being used very often if at all, in the good ole' days.
Any living creature is vulnerable to EMR, it is invasive and even pervasive, and somehow, I feel it has spread very quickly and very severely, throughout society.
We already live in an EMR environment in our homes, when you consider you are encapsulated in a 'live' and operating/active electrical field.
Now we are going to be exposed to it in our new EV cars.
When you consider the distances some of the electronic signals can travel, it's no wonder some of us are very wary of mediums that are vulnerable to being affected by such spurious electronic signals intended for one thing, yet end up also affecting the medium your in, like your car.
More so, 'driver-less cars' technology.
Can't wait to see how many people get killed or badly affected by that technology.

Altrav, there is a US city where self drive taxis are in use.
You dial them up and it comes to your door.
You have already told it where to go so get in and shut the door and
away you go.
The insurance co are watching closely. A million miles or so operated
and last I read no accidents so an accident rate better than driver
equipped taxis.
I will try and find the city and put it up here as the above is from memory.

Bazz, that would interest me, and possibly others too.
I remain skeptical, I believe it's only natural, for someone like me who has always been in control of my life, all my life, and of course, a driver-less car is something I won't be holding my breath or encouraging any time soon.

Altrav, I haven't found what I was looking for but here is a multiple
article on the same subject;

http://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa/