After Hours

General discussion



By santeewelding ·
Tags: Off Topic
Please, take care of yourself this Christmas. A recent joint study conducted by the Department of Health and the Department of Motor Vehicles indicates that 23% of traffic accidents are alcohol related.

This means that the remaining 77% are caused by a-holes who just drink coffee, carbonated drinks, juices, milk, water, and sh!t like that. Therefore, beware of those who do not drink alcohol. They cause three times as many accidents.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Especially those pond-sucking

by AnsuGisalas In reply to Friday
Collapse -

While on the subject of motor vehicle collisions

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Friday

Here are some FACTS which are food for thought.

With the Speed of a Startled Statistician.............

A recent Survey in the United Kingdom has totally altered every belief that I have ever held on motorbicyles and speed. For many years, more that I care to remember, I have believed that speed was the biggest killer on the roads - despite some sharp wits saying that?s it?s only the sudden stop that kills not the speed itself.

The highly respected survey which changed my mind showed graphically that most accidents occur between 40 - 60 KPH. Something like 75% of all road accidents involving injury and fatalities occur when vehicles are travelling at the most common speeds used by most road travellers.

At the other end of the graph were two amazingly safe areas. Speeds below 15 km\h and speeds in excess of 185 km\h both show an amazingly small number of accidents. Less than 5% of accidents occurred at this speed with accidents over 185 km\h responsible for less than 1% of the total.

The lesson we can learn from these amazing figures is simple. It is extremely dangerous to ride around at speeds between 40 & 60 km\h. If you do, there is a 75% chance you?ll have an accident. Most of you who?ve been involved in traffic accidents will agree that they happened between these highly dangerous speeds.

As a person with considerable respect in the rarified air of government, I have been discussing these figures with our federal friends. The Transport Minister, the Rt Honourable Shyttin de Carbi, agreed that accidents figures in Australia showed the same tendency towards injury and fatalities in the 40-60 km\h range. The Minister for Health and Welfare Services, the Rt Honourable Justin Agony told me that Motorbicycle injuries suffered between these speeds were by far the greatest number. More people had been carried off to hospital after an accident at 60-65 km\h than any other speed. My very good friend Sir Mark Time Minister for Certain Things, also told me that the majority of speeding offences committed occurred between 60-80 km\h, whereas the number of tickets issued for offences under 15 km\h and above 185 km\h were negligible.

As soon as this information had time to sink in. I started lobbying on behalf of motorcycle riders throughout this wonderful country. As I saw it, the answer was staring me in the face and as a person with sway in the halls of power I have put duty before bigotry and, without thought of personal gain, started lobbying for a change in the speed laws in Australia.

Don?t be surprised if, in the next few months, you hear of a really brilliant plan, announced by a fledging under-secretary to Sir Mark Time, that will cut motorcycle rider?s road death tool by 75%. You?ll have read about it here, and I?m the man responsible. As I said, the answer was staring me in the face and it is so simple.

If the majority of accidents occur between 40 - 60 km\h, make these speeds illegal. If the safest speeds are for travelling are below 15 km\h and above 185 km\h, make these speeds mandatory. My plan is to reduce city speeds to 15 km\h or below and all areas which were posted at 80 km\h or more, should be restricted to a minimum of 185 km\h.

However brilliantly simple this plan may be, I have one serious misgiving. This was explained to me by the Statistician for the Ministry of Kerosene Fridges and Roads, Miss Lydia Casserole (a young new Australian.) She explained that at 15 km\h a motorcycle would take 4.8 seconds to cross a 20 metre intersection while at 185 km\h this reduces to a mere 0.4 seconds. As we all know, the most dangerous part of any road is an intersection - it is the place where most accidents happen - so the amount of time spent in an intersection is dangerous. The rider of a 15 km\h motorcycle would be exposing himself to danger for 4.4 seconds longer than a rider at 185 km\h. For this reason, there may be some real advantages in making the 185 km\h speed limit applicable everywhere. In the example quoted above, the slow rider is 12 times more likely to have an accident than the faster rider.

Should these laws come into force we will have other excellent benefits. Apart from riding at the safest speed of all possible speeds, some improved design features will have to be incorporated into motorbicyles. Brakes will have to improve and the performance factor of almost every machine will need to be better if the machine is to remain legal. It would no longer be to equip police with large and expensive (for the Tax Payer) pursuit vehicles because people would be booked for travelling to slowly, not too fast. Bicycles would be satisfactory for highway patrols. Skills needn?t be as great (it costs the tax payer a fortune to train a policeman) and men of lower intellect and physical stature could be employed to catch slow (dangerous) vehicles.

Finally the greatest saving would be in vehicle insurance and medical services. I?m not a fool, I do understand that the few accidents which will occur at above 185 km\h will be pretty horrifying. However, because the motorcycles will be written off, the high cost of repairs can be eliminated. Also expensive ambulances, with Life Support systems and drugs aboard will be hardly necessary (saving the tax payer even more money.)

Before you take pen to paper and write to thank me for interceding on your behalf in the corridors of power, please don?t. What I have done to improve your lot was done because I just want to help. The new laws will save money and lives.

This you can believe.

B. St-F. Whitworth-Socket

Makes perfect sense to me so why hasn't it happened yet?


Collapse -

The most common accidents for bikers

by neilb@uk In reply to While on the subject of m ...

are where a car or lorry turns right across the path of an oncoming biker - "I didn't see him" - or, now that bikers can use bus-only lanes, the biker gets totalled by someone turning left across the bus lane - "I didn't see him". They tend to happen in towns and so at the lower speeds. Any slower and you've got time to stop, chase after the car driver and beat the snot out of him and that counts as a car driver injury statistic.

The accidents where bikers are at fault are where some 50 year old midlife crisis idiot starts to remember the 125 of his youth and gets himself a Suzuki GSX that does 0-60mph in a couple of seconds and wipes himself out at 90mph on a bendy road. Most of our roads are too bendy to do more than that so hence the statistical gap.


Hey, Col. Why do you Aussies use kilometres? We've got the EU pushing it for us but there was never anything wrong with miles for you.

Collapse -

Well Neil I use Kilometers

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to The most common accidents ...

Because I have a Ducati and Merc's who's native Speedios come marked that way.

But actually a Silly Politician switched to the Metric System so they they could get away with charging tax on Fuel at $5.00 + per Gallon. When they originally switched to the Metric System they passed some stupid Laws. I vividly remember bringing in some Cosworth Motors and their supplied Measuring Equipment to rebuild the motors.

We had the Feds Raid the place because the measuring Equipment wasn't Dual Calibrated in Imperial and Metric. The Judge then asked why the Engine Supplier couldn't supply Measurements in Metric to which i twas pointed out that the tolerances where too fine and converting would introduce errors into the build.

I'm not sure who was more surprised me when we got hit by 20 Feds caring weapons or the Fed who broke into my office and was told to Pi$$ OFF I'm working or are you blind?

Only took 16 months to get the Illegal Measuring Equipment back and totally ignore the LAW.

You know what they say allow any Politician to make a decision and it's going to hurt everyone.


Collapse -

The pollys looked at metricising us

by neilb@uk In reply to Well Neil I use Kilometer ...

but a short study put the cost at around 1 billion pounds. So they decided not to bother. Rare bit of sense!

Collapse -

What's a "joint study"?

by oldbaritone In reply to Friday

Sounds like something Cheech and Chong would do.



Collapse -

So what's wrong

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to What's a "joint study"?

With Studying Joints?

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me at least.


Collapse -

Indeed, as we get older the joints are the first thing to go

by Michael Jay In reply to So what's wrong
Collapse -

Likely due

by boxfiddler Moderator In reply to Indeed, as we get older t ...

to 'graduating' to bowls...

Collapse -


by seanferd In reply to Likely due

"Graduating to bowls". This. Now you have set up in my mind a whole fictional social construct and institution where people graduate to bowls. Then go for doctorates in bongs. And pass on to po<s>s</s>t-doc research in varying places where a department has an opening and one can get funding. (From the data, one can see the quality of righteous boo falls along two clines, one geographic, the other socio-economic; and plotting both dimensions on the same graph reveals these interesting patterns...)

Edit: I forgot to properly cite the quote in parentheses:
1988: <i>Distributions of Perceived Quality and Cannabinoid Content in Geographic, Political, Cultural, and Economic Milieux in the U.S. Pacific Northwest</i>. ASU: N.S. Sherlock.

Related Discussions

Related Forums