Call for ban on four-wheel drives in school zones, shopping areas

[VOGUE_MAN]

I know this is only relevant to a small number of you but if enough people complain eventually a politician will give them what they want no matter how ridiculous it is. However the reason I posted this is because if it could happen here, it could happen anywhere.

Article from The Courier Mail

ALMOST 20,000 Queenslanders have signed a petition calling for a ban on four-wheel drives in school pick-up zones and shopping areas.

The 19,728-name petition, tabled by the opposition Liberal National Party's transport spokeswoman Fiona Simpson in State Parliament yesterday, also called for higher registration fees for four-wheel drives, unless they are used for industry or on farms.

"The petition draws to the attention of the House (of Parliament) their concerns at the negative environmental impacts and effects of the excessive amount of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the use of four-wheel drive vehicles," the petition reads.

It said four-wheel drives were also a "physical danger to pedestrians and smaller vehicles in the event of collision".

The Government has yet to respond to the petition.

Nationally, most passenger car drivers think four-wheel-drives don't belong on city streets and consider them a danger to other road users, research shows.

They also want four-wheel drive owners to be hit with higher registration fees and feel intimidated when driving close to an off-road vehicle.

A recent survey, by insurer AAMI, found 77 per cent of passenger car drivers think 4x4s shouldn't be allowed in cities while 75 per cent considered them safer for the occupants but a danger to other road users.

Sixty-six per cent also backed higher registration fees for the larger vehicles.

Ironically AAMI's research also revealed that four-wheel-drive owners made fewer insurance claims than their passenger car colleagues.

The AAMI survey quizzed 2503 people across Australia.

[whiteballz]

AAMI's research base of 2503 is fairly low, and considering the disparity of 4wd/car ratio around most of australia that makes sence.

[NSXType-R]

Four wheel drives as in SUVs, or as in Subarus? I could care less about the SUVs, I do care about my Subarus though.

[Ferrer]

Well off roaders are useless on road...

[clutch-monkey]

Four wheel drives as in SUVs, or as in Subarus? I could care less about the SUVs, I do care about my Subarus though.

4X4's means SUV's.

[cmcpokey]

AAMI's research base of 2503 is fairly low, and considering the disparity of 4wd/car ratio around most of australia that makes sence.

actually, that is a good solid number of people for a +/- 3% confidence interval. if i felt like pulling up my formulae, i could even tell you how many it could represent.

[clutch-monkey]

i'd be all for it if they were specifically targeting wanker 4X4's like mercedes, BMW X5, most top model range rovers or whatever. but you know if it was implemented it will be a blanket ban and target actual 4X4's too

[Type17]

People reserve the right to drive what they want as long as it is in accordance with the law.

Whether a 4x4 Ram 1500 smacks into your Yaris, or just the RWD one, you're still gonna be getting the shaft.

This woman is truly one of those that should be in the kitchen...

[cargirl1990]

For a second, I thought the States came up with this law. No offense or anything American UCPer's but you guys have some of the stupidest laws that I have ever heard of.
i.e. Shooting someone thats one your "property".T__T

[G35COUPE]

AAMI's research base of 2503 is fairly low, and considering the disparity of 4wd/car ratio around most of australia that makes sence.

Between 500 and 1,000 samples is good enough to produce a significant outcome, if any exists. Beyond 1000 samples, is simply an overkill.

In any case, our world is being consumed by the spirit of selfishness and lack of compassion. Its all about me, me, me, and me. I literally stay away from those who are about me, me, me, and me. I don't touch them with a 10 foot pole.

[cmcpokey]

Between 500 and 1,000 samples is good enough to produce a significant outcome, if any exists. Beyond 1000 samples, is simply an overkill.

well, that depends on your alpha. so let's break this down to be perfectly correct and not just throw out bullshit for the sake of bull shit. lets talk about trying to determine a proportion for a population, since that seems to be what the topic at hand is. this is the whole formula to determine sample size:

that is a bit cumbersome, so we combine some factors, and estimate the parameter at 1/2 (thats the p-hat and q-hat) and we end up with this:

so now we can solve this. for example (and i haven't looked at the study at hand to see their data, but again, this is just to minimize bullshit spatter) we will use a 95% confidence interval for the mean, which is pretty much the standard, and a width of +/-3%. so Z for an alpha of.025 (half of .05) is 1.96, and W is 2 the width of the proportion.

so that works out to n=1.96^2/.06^2=1067.111

and in order to actually get 1068 respondants, you need to ask more. and if they all respond you have a larger sample size, which means greater accuracy, so with 2500 respondents, there is a very high likelihood that this represents the population.

[whiteballz]

You lost me at alpha.

[cmcpokey]

You lost me at alpha.

alpha is the amount of risk you are willing to take. so you want 95% confidence, then your alpha is .05. make sense? if not, don't worry about it.

[whiteballz]

makes perfect sense.. now.

[pimento]

SUVs aren't dangerous.. the blissfully ignorant/discourteous/not concentrating people who drive many of them are. As much as I hate dealing with poorly driven SUVs on the road (especially now as a biker) this is more ridiculous overregulation to appease the hysterical mothers association. If they want to make things better, then can start by better policing and fining/banning people who simply cannot drive their vehicles properly. Or require additional testing for vehicles over 2 tonnes.