For those of you who have simple view of the world and believe the crap that is being fed to you by the state governments and the safety experts who are paid by them. The following is a reality check!
John Bannon ran for a seat in the South Australian Upper House during the last election but was unfortunately sidelined at the vital moment by illness.
Here is a draft that he is working on, a monument to common sense, a position that hopefully other sensible politicians will adopt.
Vote for John Bannon and other Politicians who may share similar views.
The only real result of current Road Safety policies is Corruption. Why ?– because the policies are founded on lies and research crafted to satisfy a minority that is primarily interested in removing cars and motorcycles from the road.
It is important to note the context. Road trauma – whilst obviously a matter to be considered seriously is not a dominant risk factor for the individual when compared with other things he or she should be worried about.
The best example is Medical Error. Whilst not reflecting on the professionalism and commitment of the medical fraternity it is still a fact that one is ten times more likely to be killed as a result of hospitalization for ten times less exposure. There is no record of either accountability at the operational level nor expenditure associated with error prevention.
Where does the corruption manifest itself? – the coal face of what is now called "Law enforcement". Unbelievably draconian powers have been provided to people to enforce so called laws that are victimless and coercive. Offences are invested on the ludicrous assumption that the "State" knows what is good for its citizen and then proceeds to compel the citizen to behave in an unnatural manner. The most serious aspect of this type of "law" is that is operates on the principle that a serious offence could or might be committed.
This issue is extremely serious because these laws actually impact a very high percentage of the nations populations and serve mainly to trivialize the law and bring its operatives, the various constabularies, into disrepute. Of this there can be no doubt as the most superficial examination of the attitude of the public to this component of public order will reveal. Young drivers refer the their "P" plates as standing for "pull me over" and so on.
The Common Law has held that where there is no injury there is no offence. Whilst this is primarily to do with property it is nonetheless a valuable principle. Governments generally have powers to make laws for good government and the welfare and stability of its constituents. If it is good government to invest laws "in case" then should they not be invented to cover other contingencies? Everyone is capable of stealing or murdering but there are no laws restricting citizens liberty unless and until they commit the offence.
Even the administration of road use concerning those who drive under the influence of one form of substance or another has simply become an opportunity for Nazi style interference with freedom of movement – complete with Gestapo style uniforms clearly intended to intimidate.
Constabularies routinely conduct meaningless RBT campaigns on high traffic volume routes that are spectacular in the number of drivers whose rights and liberties are gratuitously dismissed, and the virtually insignificant number of drivers affected by alcohol identified. ( If a driver is stoned out of his brain but lucid there is no way of measuring this so he will probably be able to resume his journey).
The public are entitled to ask why – if this draconian practice is even slightly justified, it is not restricted to application to obvious targets like popular pubs.
So why do motorists meekly accept the day by day insinuation that they are homicidal maniacs? Further, why do their organizations such as the RAA in South Australia participate so enthusiastically in the perpetuation of the myth that "speed" is the primary cause of accidents?
Why does the entire motor industry remain mute in the face of anti-car and anti motorist rhetoric pumped out every day of the week but even more hysterically at holiday times? Has no one stopped to ask why anyone would bother to upgrade their motor vehicle when they are never to be able to use that vehicle to any extent consistent with is capabilities?
Speed cameras and the oppressive apparatus of State are increasingly more secretive and even more obviously criminally ineffective in improving Road Safety. The totally outrageously disproportionate level of fines and liberty deprivation extending to the potential for loss of job, home and family for non compliance with some quite arbitrary and inconsequential number is a public disgrace and accelerating the contempt of the public for the rule of law and those whose task is to administer it.
There will be those that argue "they are only doing their job". That simply confirms that these people are part of the problem. Recently the State Government of Queensland wanted local authorities to administer the application of a levy to provide services such as ambulances and so on. The Local mayors refused so the scheme was not implemented.
The constabularies are more aware than anyone else that the Road Safety policies are contrary to evidence but have now become such an important part of the Taxation/Revenue stream that the middle and senior management level officers dare not inform their political masters (and the politicization of constabularies is itself a major problem) that their policies are inappropriate.
Fundamental to resolution to injustice and the restoration of confidence is a return to the 85 percentile rule when considering Road Safety policies.
Authoritative research indicates that the vast majority of drivers are quite capable of establishing a comfortable and safe rate of progress. Current policies ignore this fact which enables the corrupt practice of setting speed limits to create revenue. Institutional corruption – and its support in the media which readily parrots the constabulary line. This is that the two primary causes of accidents are fatigue and speed.
Even if this was true – which it is not – it is an internally inconsistent statement in terms of policy development. Returning to the 85 percentile rule the vast majority of drivers travel across country at rate of progress that minimizes the prospect of fatigue and because they are exercising their freewill deal with the lesser issue of fatigue accordingly. To expect a driver to take four hours to travel to Port Augusta from Adelaide when it can be comfortably achieved in three is absurd and creates dangerous situations.
Fatigue is a product of boredom and lack of involvement in process. Put a driver in the average mechanically sound vehicle on a virtually straight road, unless his rate of progress requires his attention he will fall asleep. Simple as that.
Other international jurisdictions are waking up to the pointlessness of pursuing policies that simply alienate their constituencies. Canada Hawaii and many of the States in the U.S.A. have turned away from "speed" based traffic management. Even Montana which toyed for a while with implementing speed limits maintains unlimited roads outside of metropolitan areas. As with our own Northern Territory which has the lowest accident rate in the country and no open road speed limit.
Politicians are away with the fairies if they think that the answer to the Road Toll is to increase penalties Bureaucrats, especially the constabularies, are too frightened to point out that 99.999% of penalties are actually paid and incurred by people who have not actually done anything wrong at all, except fail to be coerced into conforming with some poorly established set of numbers e.g. a speed limit that ignores the reality of the behaviour majority. Motorists that actually do cause damage and injury are a tiny minority of road users. By further subjecting the majority to outrageous penalties governments will only serve to alienate their constituencies and corrupt their police forces.
Virtually every accident is a result of failure to apply common sense either through malice, incompetence, selfishness or ignorance. None of these characteristics respond to coercion. To persist in social engineering of this type is doomed to failure because is lacks integrity.
John R. Bannon