ILLEGAL TRUCK PARKING

The illegal truck stop that has North Jersey cops at their wit's end

A tractor-trailer parked on the shoulder on I-287 in Mahwah. Local officials say despite their efforts to keep trucks from parking on the highway, truckers still stop night after night.

By Fausto Giovanny Pinto | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com 

MAHWAH — Every night, day after day, hulking tractor-trailers line up here, on the shoulder of I-287, idling for hours at this illegal truck stop.

The drivers come out to smoke as cars whiz past. They stretch and rest on the extra-wide shoulder, just minutes from the New York state line.

Despite tickets, signs and police patrols in the area, the trucks return night after night. Mahwah officials, for their part, say they are at their wit's end with the trucks, and that their efforts to curb what they say is a dangerous situation have proven unsuccessful.

"We come along and move them but an hour later they are back," Mahwah Chief of Police James Batelli said. "We can't continue to allocate resources every night."

Trucks are banned from using the Garden State Parkway north of exit 105, but a reader says he sees them driving on it anyway. What's allow and what's not?

And when confronted, many drivers tell police that they can't drive anymore because they have exceeded the amount of miles they can legally drive in the day, Batelli said.

"If you don't arrive at a truck stop by 1 to 2 p.m. in New York or New Jersey you won't get a spot," Rick Toutges, a truck driver from South Dakota, said Friday at the nearby Pilot truck stop on Route 17. "We can only drive 11 hours a day, and when that's up we can't go anymore because we'll get fined."

Highway America

Kevin Johnson, a trucker from "the great state of Michigan," agreed that it was dangerous to park illegally on the side of an interstate, but also decried the fact that there's very little parking for truckers. 

"Look at where I'm at (now), squeezed in here," Johnson said as his truck stood in a corner of the packed Pilot truck stop. "They need to build more stops."

The shoulder of road where the trucks stop on 287 is particular dangerous due to steep inclines and the merging of the highway from three lanes into two, Batelli said.

He said he would like the shoulder narrowed or removed.

"This is truly a state problem," Batelli said. "I wish the state took more engineering studies of the area."

A spokesman from the state Department of Transportation said the agency has not heard from Mahwah officials about the problem.

"There are a number of private rest stops throughout the state that accommodate truck drivers," said Steve Schapiro, communications director at the DOT. "It's important to remember that it is unlawful to stop on the shoulders of state highways except for emergencies, which makes this a law enforcement issue."

Batelli said State Police routinely patrol the area, but the trucks return soon after they are moved . . . 

For the full article

Fausto Giovanny Pinto may be reached at fpinto@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @FGPreporting. 

Peter Blakeborough, a former interstate driver, say truck drivers have three options:

One. They can keep on driving after they have exceeded their legal driving hours, risking a fine, or worse going to sleep at the wheel and killing someone.

Two. They can park illegally when they have run out of hours and failed to fine safe and legal parking, risking another fine and a possible accident.

Three. They can abandon truck driving and let others worry about delivering the goods on time, often to the very people who show no consideration for the welfare of truckers.

It has been clear for many years that governments, federal and state, have no intention to fund adequate parking for interstate trucks. They fail to understand that these drivers do not return to their home depots every night. They are normally on the road for weeks at a time. Many states do provide rest areas close to interstates, but these are few and far between in heavily populated states like New Jersey and New York. In many rest areas trucks are restricted to four hours parking, even though the law requires drivers to rest for ten continuous hours. For truck drivers, whatever they do, they will be damned if they do and damned if they don't.

American truck parking is a shameful fiasco and the main culprit is federal and state governments. For years they have been playing the famous American game called Pass the Buck. It's time the buck stopped.

NEW ZEALAND HOUSING

Voters hold the key to New Zealand’s housing problems

A 1905 Liberal Government
worker's house near Wellington

A 1930's Labour Government state housing street

It's time for New Zealanders to get over their attitude to social housing. New Zealand has had a housing crisis since colonial days. Homelessness and housing deprivation is not new. It has been increasing for at least 150 years.

Numerous governments from the 1890's onward have attempted to overcome housing problems, but with limited success. First there was worker housing early in the twentieth century, followed by state and council housing.

But Kiwis are obsessed with home ownership and refuse to accept that not everyone is able (or wants) to be a home owner. In many developed countries, particularly in Europe, the attitude is different. Social housing is acceptable and carries no stigma, the way it does in New Zealand. In some countries social housing amounts to 25-50% of all housing stock. In New Zealand that figure is less than 5%.

People at the bottom end of the socio-economic ladder have always struggled with housing in New Zealand. They struggle basically because the average Kiwi believes that they should own their own home, or go without. The state shouldn't have to help them. Alternately, Kiwis will say that a state house should be okay only for the very poorest and only until they get established. Then they should make way for someone else.

When New Zealand had state owned banking, insurance, coal-mines, and airlines, why was it okay to use these services, but not okay to use a government house? Doesn't that show a flaw in our thinking?

Successive governments have known about the true state of New Zealand housing for generations, but have been powerless to fix the problem. In the end government can only do what the voters will allow them to do, and the majority of Kiwi voters do not believe in social housing. A few here and there, yes, but 20% of houses throughout the country? A definite no to that. A program to build the required number of houses started by one government would be abandoned by the next government three years later, and before any real benefits were evident.

Housing in New Zealand will change when Kiwis change their thinking.

Like most countries, New Zealand goes through economic cycles and the cycles contribute to the growing numbers of homeless. When the economy booms, people are homeless because they can't afford the high cost of renting or buying. When the economy slumps, they can't afford to buy or rent because they don't enough income.

Typically, in a downturn, people stop building houses because of reduced demand and trades people leave the country or go into other industries. House prices fall, businesses and jobs disappear. But the downturn is always only temporary. Recovery is just around the corner. During these downturns the government has an excellent opportunity to increase the housing stock ready for the next boom, and to keep the tradesmen in the country and working. But most important, it should be houses waiting for people, not people waiting for houses.

Finally, why does the average Kiwi think that state tenants should have to move on when they can afford to buy a house? What is the point? Did the same Kiwis think that people doing business with the old Bank of New Zealand, or State Insurance, or National Airways Corporation, should be restricted to being customers only for a specific time? They didn't, and it makes no sense to limit tenants in social housing. In fact, I believe they should be encouraged to stay for the rest of their days and to treat the house as though it were their own.

But none of this can happen until New Zealanders re-invent their social housing attitudes. Meanwhile, it won't matter who is Minister of Social Housing. That minister will always be unpopular. Can anyone remember a Minister of Housing who was popular? Like the people Paula Bennett would like to help, she is stuck between a rock and a hard place. In New Zealand it will always be a brave minister who takes on housing, until Kiwis change.

 

Minister of Social Housing
Paula Bennett

THE FLAG OR JOHN KEY

Should New Zealand change its flag or its Prime Minister?

CHANGING THE FLAG

New Zealand’s flag debate steps up a notch with the first vote

The United Tribes flag
of New Zealand 1835-1840

The campaign to change the New Zealand flag started after the end of World War II, with Labour Prime Minister Peter Fraser leading the charge as New Zealand independence approached. But Fraser’s government was defeated in 1949 and the flag debate waxed and waned over the following decades.

Following full independence in 1947, the British Government lost the right to create laws for New Zealand, and New Zealanders lost their British citizenship. Only New Zealanders with a grandfather born in the UK could then have free access to work and live in the UK.

In the 1970’s, with the United Kingdom’s entry to the European Union and the loss of preferred trading arrangements, the flag campaign moved into a higher gear with some opinion polls showing a majority in favour of change.

Proponents of change wanted a flag that was distinctly New Zealand rather than a British inspired variation of the Australian flag. As immigration patterns changed and Maori became recognised as being entitled to equal rights, the proponents wanted a flag that would honour all ethnic groups.

The British Union flag was the official
flag for New Zealand from 1840-1902

The distinctive silver fern leaf, worn by sporting teams and soldiers since the late 1800’s, was New Zealand’s best known emblem. Other emblems included the native flightless kiwi bird and the koru (loop) representing an unfurling new frond on a silver fern, and the tiki (a grotesque humanoid carving) representing the first Maori man and woman.

All of New Zealand’s better known emblems have appeared at some time on the country’s banknotes and coinage, but never on the national flag. Pride of place on the flag has always been reserved for the Union jack, itself a merger of the flags of England, Scotland and Ireland, but not of Wales or any of the colonies. It has been very much a case of they can exclude us but we must not exclude them. Some New Zealanders regard that acquiescence as grovelling.

The loss of British citizenship and access for New Zealand produce was a significant upheaval for many New Zealanders that ultimately led to a major restructuring of industry and the New Zealand economy in the 1980’s and 90’s in changes referred to as Rogernomics, after Minister of Finance, Roger Douglas who initiated the reforms. This added fuel to the fire of the flag reformers, who questioned the appropriateness of keeping the British flag in the top corner of the former colony’s flag.

New Zealand's third official flag was
used occasionally from 1867-1869

As the debate intensified, the two largest political parties promised during the 2014 election campaign a vote on the flag. Early in 2015 a non-partisan parliamentary committee laid down the process which included appointing the Flag Consideration Panel to seek public input and consider alternative flag designs. As the process got under way, the Labour Party, while still part of the committee, started distancing itself from the process to score political points. Entrenched opponents of change saw Labour’s phoney reluctance as a chance to isolate National Party Prime Minister John Key as a manipulator and glory seeker. Labour has come close to derailing the flag process, but has gained nothing politically from opinion polls.

As the first vote for a single alternative design drew near, pro-change and pro-old flag contestants became divided more along party lines, even though it has been a cross-party process with only one small party not joining the parliamentary flag committee.

The current flag was adopted in 1902
and is New Zealand's fourth flag

The Panel received 10,300 designs which they narrowed down to a short list of 40 and then a final list of four. But uproar followed with many claiming that the Prime Minister had overridden the Panel and that a design known as Red Peak should have been included. Some opponents of change seized on the opportunity to fight for Red Peak, seeing it as having little chance if pitted against the existing flag, and thereby frustrating the process. Finally, Parliament emended the legislation to include Red Peak at a cost of $260,000, but it was eliminated early by the voters in the preferential system used in the first referendum. Many people saw that as confirmation that the Panel had correctly excluded Red Peak from the final short list.

MORE:
Votes for Women
The New Zealand Tour Commentary
New Zealand Independence
New Zealand Protests

The pro-old flag lobby have raised many frivolous objections to changing the flag, too many to go into in this post, but watch for future posts as the debate continues in the run-up to the final one-on-one vote in March 2016. Meanwhile, I’ve penned a couple of verses to sum up the flag situation in New Zealand.

The Cross-Roads in the Corner

Our flag bears a lost empire’s cross-roads in the corner
There on the instructions of our 1902 colonial masters.
In 1907 they said, on your own, cow-cockies Downunder
Oh, no. We said. Who would buy our butter?
But, the Statute of Westminster will set you free.
But freedom will not sell our wool, mutton or beef.
We want to keep the flag with lost cross-roads in the corner.

When 1914 came round, they said, Forget all that. We’re at war.
Send us a generation of able-bodied and fit young men
Send us your butter and meat by the shipload too
And when the boys are lying dead in foreign fields of mud
Tell the widows and the mothers and the little children
That they died honourably defending their flag
The flag with the lost empire cross-roads in the corner.

Another generation and another war to end all wars
Conscription again to force youth to fight, that was the law
They took our produce and essentials, Kiwi kids went without
Another eleven thousand Kiwis died, supposedly for the flag
The flag with the lost empire cross-roads in the corner.

In 1947, we finally, reluctantly and quietly became independent
But we kept the old colonial flag to remain near to the Old Country
And we kept the old colonial flag to glorify all the wars past
The flag with the lost empire cross-roads in the corner.

1973, and our former colonial masters gave us the greatest shove ever
With the stroke of a pen, they joined Europe and said, Kiwis go to hell
And take your old colonial rag and shove it where the sun don’t shine
The flag you love so much, with the lost empire cross-roads in the corner.

But a campaign was growing to run up a real New Zealand flag
A flag that would look to the future with confidence, hope and pride
A flag that would bury forever our bloody colonial past
A flag that would recognise and honour all our ethnic groups
A flag that champions would wear on their uniforms with pride
A flag that the whole world would identify with New Zealand
A flag that would fly our famous emblem, the beautiful, unique silver fern
And not the flag with the sad lost empire cross-roads in the corner.

In the first vote two of the five alternatives were separated by just 1% with the flag known as the Silver Fern Black White and Blue just edging out the Silver Fern Red White and Blue, both designed by Kyle Lockwood in 2005. The other three flags didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell and collected only a handful of votes.

The five short-listed flags in the
2015 referendum

After a vigorous campaign on social media to frustrate the vote, and protest at the government spending $26 million on the flag referendums, by casting informal votes, the campaign failed with less than 10% of the votes being informal.

Meanwhile, the campaign steps up a notch with many prominent New Zealanders declaring their position, mostly in favour of change. With the masses it is the other way around with about 60% (down from 80% earlier) to about 40% in favour of change.

Continued below . . .

Peter's Books

Flag makers have been busy and most of the sales have been for copies of the current flag, itself a turn-around from earlier times when few flags flew from private flagpoles. But now that a single alternative flag has been selected by the voters from five finalists, the flag makers will be extra busy as new orders roll in for the challenger.

The Round 1 winner is the black and
blue silver fern flag

One thing is certain in the little land Downunder, flagapathy has flown out the window, and a distinctively new New Zealand flag could fly in.

CHANGING THE FLAG

It's got something old
And something new
A little of our famous black
With the same old blue
A Southern Cross bright
A silver fern just right
Our new New Zealand flag



Footnote:

The result of the referendum was 56% in favour of the old flag and 44% for the new flag. For many people the campaign to change New Zealand's flag is continuing and the silver fern flag can be seen flying from many flagpoles.

A Southern Cross bright
A silver fern just right
Our new New Zealand flag.
A Southern Cross bright
A silver fern just right
Our new New Zealand flag.

AN ISLAND FOR SALE

No-one watches over
Watchman’s Island

It sits just 600 meters from the shore in Auckland, New Zealand’s Waitemata Harbour and no-one owns it or administers it. Auckland is experiencing an unprecedented housing boom, but no-one has yet applied for a building permit for Watchman’s Island.

In any of the nearby suburbs, finding a house priced at less than a million dollars is like looking for a needle in a haystack. But Watchman’s Island remains uninhabited.

Watchman's Island, Auckland, New Zealand

The state of affairs on Watchman’s Island is really quite remarkable (the words ‘state of affairs’ should not be taken as meaning an independent state that encourages affairs with other people’s spouses, even though there is a single shade tree ample for the purpose). What is remarkable about the island is that it is really prime real estate with excellent sea views, a private sandy beach, quiet neighbors, and no taxes.

Although never permanently inhabited, Watchman’s Island has an interesting history.

It first appeared on a British Admiralty chart in 1857 as Sentinel Rock. No-one knows why it was called Sentinel Rock, but it appears to have been given a name change in the 1970s when an Auckland journalist wrote a weekly report on New Zealand goings–on, as seen from ‘Watchman’s Island’ and the name stuck.

 

The New Zealand Tour Commentary

At about that time someone interested in buying the island failed in his quest because he was unable to find an owner who could sell it to him. The island was ownerless.

All government departments and local government denied responsibility for Watchman’s Island. Officially, it does not exist. But the island certainly does exist and is clearly visible from the shore and to traffic crossing the Auckland Harbour Bridge and it seemed that anyone who wanted the island could have it for the taking. As Watchman’s has no defence force, a full-scale invasion could be mounted successfully from a single row-boat.

In spite of the island’s zero population it has a thriving yacht club. In the 1990s some radio-control yachting enthusiasts formed the Watchman’s Island Yacht Club. They sailed their miniature yachts briefly from the island but found it to be too hard going without a suitable marina and all the other facilities that old salts enjoy at the end of a hard day’s sailing.

In 2005 the island was briefly inhabited by a crouching Adidas metal figure promoting the British Lions’ rugby tour of New Zealand. But the figure was soon toppled by a saboteur on the grounds that it was culturally insensitive and the island was once again uninhabited.

Watchman’s Island was next in the news when an agent for a local realty company had a sign erected on the island advertising it for sale. No information is available about a sale price, or prospective buyers, and the sign has since been taken down or washed away.

Meanwhile, the island has not applied for a building permit, or United Nations membership.

 

Peter's Books

 

 

 

 

A UN ROAD TRAFFIC AGENCY

A million die in road traffic accidents every year

Meanwhile, governments do little and the United Nations does even less

The United Nations was founded in 1945 by 51 countries committed to maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights.

This year the UN, now with a membership of 193, is celebrating 70 years of progress and achievements. The world body has expanded to include 17 major agencies covering many aspects of the daily lives of billions of people worldwide. The UN is often criticised for its failures, and there have been many, but the UN is also the world’s greatest ever political and humanitarian success story. This is often overlooked by critics.

As the celebrations wind up, the UN should be resolving to include among its agencies, by the time of the 75^th anniversary celebrations, an international road traffic organisation dedicated to reducing death and injury from traffic accidents worldwide.

Currently, the UN has as an agency the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) which has been largely responsible for making airline travel the safest form of transport ever, while reducing substantially the rate of general aviation accidents. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is responsible for regulatory control, safety and efficiency of shipping. Many other UN agencies are well known like the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Bank Group (WBG) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), The United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and The International Labour Organization (ILO). There is also a raft of lesser known, but vital agencies, like the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), and The World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

Many UN agencies have come in for severe criticism over the years and in some cases the UN may have failed, but the bulk of the criticism comes from a lack of understanding, suspicion and from people with extremist political and economic views. But without the UN the world would be a poorer and more violent place.

However, there is no UN organization dedicated to saving lives on the world’s highways, even though over a million people are killed every year, scores of millions more are seriously injured, and the cost to society is astronomical. The United Nations leaves it to national governments to do their own thing and almost all fail dismally. It is time for the world body to establish an organization that can bring uniformity, standards and targets to a global campaign for road safety

Although there are currently several non-UN organizations that have been established for transport and traffic, most represent commercial interests.

However, the United Nations Economic and Social Council was responsible for the 1968 Geneva Convention on Road Traffic, a treaty intending to establish standard traffic rules, but only 73 countries have ratified the treaty. In addition, the Council set up the Convention on Road Signs and Signals, but only 15 states ratified that treaty. There was also the earlier 1949 Geneva Convention on Road Traffic, which dealt mainly with International Driving Permits, ratified by only 95 states, and generally regarded as a failure.

An International Road Traffic Organization could have more clout if it was a separate UN body, independent of the UN Economic and Social Council.

The Organization could set target dates for member states to adopt standards for driver training, testing and licensing. Instead of having a national license and an optional, but worthless, International Driving Permit, all licenses would be classed as international, but containing an endorsement for left or right side driving. Data sharing could prevent suspended drivers from driving in other states.

A target date for achieving uniform traffic rules and signs could be set, including a target for adopting metric measurements, rules, symbols and signs.

Like ICAO, an International Road Traffic Organization could establish universal standards for the investigation and reporting of accidents. Each member state would have an accident investigation unit operating independent of any other governmental body.

Commercial drivers currently have their driving time restricted in some states, but not in others. Amateur drivers can do as they please everywhere. A worldwide body could establish uniform driving time limitations for all.

Vehicle design standards vary from country to country, and currently many countries do not require periodic vehicle inspections. The Organization could greatly increase vehicle safety. The practice of disposing of unsafe vehicles in countries with lower standards, or no standards, could end.
Continued below . . .

HIGHWAY AMERICA

The mandatory installation of GPS tracking, vehicle data recording and access limiting technology could have many benefits including improved road safety and lower insurance costs.

In this world of increasing international mobility, it is going to be vital to plan for even greater mobility in the years ahead and to adopt rules that will be understood and accepted everywhere. Wherever a person drives in the world, he or she should be able to do so confident that the rules are the same, and that other drivers will also be driving to the same rules.

Universal rules for flying and shipping, with few exceptions, have applied for many years and work well. It is time for motorists and their passengers to expect no less. It is time for the United Nations to take the lead.

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

CASH MACHINE ROBBERIES

How to beat ATM robbers by reversing your PIN number

A circulating email gives what is claimed to be sound advice on how to beat an ATM robber who forces you to withdraw cash.

The email claims that entering a reverse PIN number will alert police. But the email is a hoax and anyone following the advice in the email could expose themselves to even greater danger.

Anyone receiving circulating advice emails of any kind should always Google the information to check for reliability before forwarding it to contacts and Facebook friends.

Today I saw the offending email reproduced on Facebook and I have reproduced it below. Readers will note that it does not refer to any authority, or provide any kind of verification, or links to any authority or verification. The reference to Crime Stoppers is false.

Forwarding or sharing this false information may cause harm

The email first started circulating in 2006 and was based on a patent taken out in 1986 which would have enabled banks to install the technology in their ATM machines. But to date no known banks have taken up the system.

At least two US states tried and failed to legislate for a reverse PIN system, also known as Safety PIN. The banks’ opposition is based on several facts:

A Twist of Fate

The cost of implementing the system would have been prohibitive. The police responses take longer than ATM transactions and they would only arrive long after offender and victim had departed the scene. In addition, if the Safety PIN system became widely known to bank customers it would also be just as widely known to offenders. An offender seeing that a number carefully inserted failed to give up cash could simply kill the card holder and put the number in, reversed again, and get the cash. The banks also found another problem; some popular PIN numbers like 3333 or 2112 cannot be reversed.

The wisest thing to do when surprised by a criminal at an ATM would be to stay calm, while appearing to panic, put any bunch of numbers into the machine three times and have the card swallowed by the machine. The only other thing you can do is scream, run, or do both as loudly and as quickly as you can.

The fallacy of reverse PIN numbers can be verified by going to Wikipedia, Snopes, Hoax Slayer and many other reliable sites. The official New Zealand Police website also carries a warning about the reverse PIN hoax.

You cannot beat an ATM criminal by reversing your PIN number.

READ MORE:
Natural or Manufactured Remedies
Psychics Sensing Murder
Cancer and Living Longer
Poison From the Sky
Retirement and Domestic Diplomacy