# Speed Cameras



## altstart (24/6/11)

New toys for the Qld police Be Careful.

Cheers Altstart


----------



## seemax (24/6/11)

Common in Melbourne, especially around the Western Ring Road currently... but rarely enforced.

Now if only they could manage to finish roadworks on their predicted date...


----------



## DU99 (24/6/11)

we had a set of camera's on the hume highway,that had to be turned off ..they where faulty..

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/826449...in-switched-off


----------



## yardy (24/6/11)

altstart said:


> New toys for the Qld police Be Careful.
> 
> Cheers Altstart



Bastards..

where were they when scum broke into my house, no revenue in rounding up filth that break and enter :angry:


----------



## bconnery (24/6/11)

altstart said:


> View attachment 46627
> 
> 
> New toys for the Qld police Be Careful.
> ...


I hate roadworks. Not only do they leave the speed limits in place when they aren't working half the time but if you do attempt to stick to the speed limit, especially on motorway roadworks, you end up with idiots all over your tail because you are trying to do 40 where they use to be able to do 100...
I do appreciate it isn't a great environment for workers, especially night roadworks, which is why I do try to drop down on the speed, but it does make things difficult...
I'll have to drop from my common habit of ending up on 50 odd though...


----------



## Tony (24/6/11)

the police farce has become a money making exercise with a few low paid security guards with guns doing paperwork in the station while the crime runs its course!


----------



## drsmurto (24/6/11)

Are the ignorant who claim speed cameras are revenue raising.

If you don't speed you don't get fined and no revenue is raised.

But of course that is quite clearly rocket science and only my fellow rocket scientists can understand such complex logic...

This country is getting more retarded by the minute. <_< And they allow you to vote?


----------



## TasChris (24/6/11)

DrSmurto said:


> Are the ignorant who claim speed cameras are revenue raising.
> 
> If you don't speed you don't get fined and no revenue is raised.
> 
> ...


I agree, its a voluntary tax that you can opt out of at any time. If you wish to contribute, keep speeding.

Cheers
Chris


----------



## drsmurto (25/6/11)

TasChris said:


> I agree, its a voluntary tax that you can opt out of at any time. If you wish to contribute, keep speeding.
> 
> Cheers
> Chris



There was an ad years ago by the government (possibly SA only, i don't recall) that was a bit like a late night ad for those miraculous ab machines that suggested it had the perfect way to prevent people from being caught by speed cameras.

Don't speed.

It really is that simple and to argue otherwise demonstrates nothing but the encyclopaedic definition of ignorance.


----------



## Zizzle (25/6/11)

Who are we kidding. Don't speed. Pfft.

They are hooked on the revenue. If it declines then so will the speed limits.

There are studies that say that people will drive at the speed they think is safe. If you set the speed limit lower than this then you rake in the cash without actually increasing safety.

LA is actually ripping out it's red light cameras. No increase in safety.

http://www.laweekly.com/2011-06-16/news/ja...-light-cameras/

Councils have been seen lowering the yellow light time to increase revenue from cameras. No safety increase there.

After a few years of driving in the US I have come to appreciate how draconian and over policed australian roads are.

Haven't seen any speed cameras. And we happily drive past the state troopers at 80 - 85 mph all the time (75 limit) on the interstate. It's hard to argue this is dangerous on the dual carriageway when it's just keeping up with the traffic.


----------



## yardy (25/6/11)

Zizzle said:


> *how draconian and over policed australian roads are.*



exactly, in a 2 hour drive from Gladstone to Bundaberg last night, i passed 4 highway patrol vehicles and a 'flash for cash' Prado, school holidays have started so it's another revenue blitz for the duration.


----------



## seemax (25/6/11)

DrSmurto said:


> There was an ad years ago by the government (possibly SA only, i don't recall) that was a bit like a late night ad for those miraculous ab machines that suggested it had the perfect way to prevent people from being caught by speed cameras.
> 
> Don't speed.
> 
> It really is that simple and to argue otherwise demonstrates nothing but the encyclopaedic definition of ignorance.



This made perfect sense in the 10% days, not the 3km/h rule as per current Vic law.


----------



## bum (25/6/11)

bconnery said:


> Not only do they leave the speed limits in place when they aren't working half the time


I've worked in road works, both on tools and in traffic management, and I can tell you that the reason it is set up like this is because many people complain when the speed limit frequently goes up and down in one spot and just as many use that as an excuse not to pay attention to what the signs say at any time "It was 80 here yesterday!" The speed limit is left low because people are selfish arseholes and they can't be given an excuse.


----------



## DU99 (25/6/11)

we forget what's the speed limit's in NT and on the autobarn's..and some of those roadwork's sign's are left up over the weekend's when there is no need for them,just the lazy traffic management staff have failed to remove them


----------



## Liam_snorkel (25/6/11)

The point-to-point cameras have been switched on on the Bruce highway north of Brisbane.. on what has to be the smoothest safest stretch of road possible. 
The sign reads "Speed Cameras next 16km FOR ROAD SAFETY".
Road safety my arse. Thanks for increasing my commute time.


----------



## bum (26/6/11)

DU99 said:


> just the lazy traffic management staff have failed to remove them


Either that or the law tells them they have to because the roads are populated by dead-shit morons.


----------



## DUANNE (26/6/11)

if the poice are really convinced that speed cameras work so wel, why is it in victoria they, as part of industrial action are parking in front of hidden cameras and unmarked camera cars with lights flashing to warn motorists and ,in theyre own words, cut government revenue. when questioned about it they say it wil actualy reduce speeding on the road by being so visible and may have a positive effect on the road toll.this in my mind has cemented a long term belief that cameras are revenue raisers and nothing else, and it seems the police agree.


----------



## bum (26/6/11)

I think everyone recognises that a cop car with light flashing lights on every street would have a massive impact on speeding. I think everyone also recognises that it isn't remotely realistic to think such a proposal could actually be applied.

Your comment indicates to me that you might be the type of person to say "Why aren't you out catching _real_ criminals?" when pulled over - and yet here you are applauding the force's abject waste of limited resources in order to further a _political_ position (essentially taking food from a citizen's mouth at the same time). Defending this action seems pretty self-serving to me.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (26/6/11)

How come I can drive at 120km/hr and am not dead yet.....

Why does the government try to tell every one of us that if you speed you will die...

FFS People die doing 60km/h, so if their way of thinking is true, why are we not doing 60km/h on our highways to stop us all from dying


----------



## Pollux (26/6/11)

I have luckily never been done for speeding. I pay zero attention to my speedo while driving on suburban streets in Sydney (unless I am going through a speed camera) I simply drive to the conditions and keep my eyes where they should be, on the freaking road....

My ultimate hate is the speed camera's in school zones, due to the increased fines/demerit points people drive through these zones looking at NOTHING except their speedo, it's a good distraction from the sound of small children bouncing off the bonnet.

I also agree with Stu, I personally sit on 120-130 on all multilane motorways where traffic/weather conditions permit. Have been doing so for years, have managed to not be dead and have actually avoided many accidents because at that speed one is always scanning for radar cars so you tend to be more attentive.


----------



## DUANNE (26/6/11)

bum said:


> I think everyone recognises that a cop car with light flashing lights on every street would have a massive impact on speeding. I think everyone also recognises that it isn't remotely realistic to think such a proposal could actually be applied.
> 
> Your comment indicates to me that you might be the type of person to say "Why aren't you out catching _real_ criminals?" when pulled over - and yet here you are applauding the force's abject waste of limited resources in order to further a _political_ position (essentially taking food from a citizen's mouth at the same time). Defending this action seems pretty self-serving to me.




i think you missed my point,i didnt say i approve of the industrial action by the police but merely that it is further proof that the cameras are a revenue raising device and not a safety device at all. remember the car load of kids that crashed on the westgate last year and killed themselves? they had passed a speed camera a couple of clicks before and crashed less than 1 k from the next one doing 200 or so ks an hour. cameras do not work. im on the road 10-12 hours a day and would say that from what i witness a fair majoroty of speeeding cars know were the fixed cameras are and slow down for a couple of hundred meters from the camera then just plant the right foot until the next one. same deal applies when a mobile camera is spotted in time, wich is most times they are on the road. all these cameras really achieve is to rip in more money for the govt of the day(also taking food from somes mouth) from some poor soul who does a whopping dangerous 3ks over the limit.funnily enough on roads where cameras have been removed in britain accident rates have remained unchanged.


----------



## bum (26/6/11)

My apologies if I've misrepresented you.

May I ask you a question (and this is an open question to all - uh, except for the anarchists suggesting that their speeding is fine and **** every other prick) - what is it your propose that a Government or enforcement body might actually be able to do apart from impose and enforce punishments for what any reasonable person would have to suggest is, at the very least in some cases, a dangerous and anti-social behaviour? I see that you're saying that it doesn't stop speeding from existing but see no evidence to suggest it has no impact at all. In fact, as a younger bloke I was regularly copping fines from camera cars, got a bit tired of it and changed my behaviour. I _very much_ doubt I can be the only one in a similar position.

There are all sorts of laws and none of them are about stopping bad things from happening. The police do not exist to stop bad things from happening. Both exist to slap us on the wrist when we are naughty boys and girls. What was it you might tell your kids when they carry on when in trouble? Stop being a sook? Something like that?


----------



## DUANNE (26/6/11)

unfortunatly i believe a stronger police presence on the roads would be the best answer, its amazing how nobody speeds when there is a cop car in close vicinity. the problem is no matter witch side of politics gets in to power they all have the same attitude that making money on a serious problem is preferable to actually spending money and having a greater impact to fixing the problem once and for all.if the current govt spent half as much money on increasing police presence as it has on reviewing every little thing that comes up they could have saved a lot of lives. the real problem is the previous mob were just as bad, and the next mob will be as bad again.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (26/6/11)

FTR, I give every fixed / hidden speed camera the forks as I drive past. Feels good man.


----------



## bum (26/6/11)

BEERHOG said:


> unfortunatly i believe a stronger police presence on the roads would be the best answer


I'm not going to pretend that I think speed cameras are the be all and end all but if I sit back and try to think about the logistics of implementing your idea above it becomes apparent pretty quickly that it just can't work. I completely agree that a visible police presence would have a more dramatic effect (I think I may have already admitted this earlier) but to have enough cops out on the road to make a significant impact is just impossible. How many roads are there in your local area? Which ones would you prioritise for most coverage? How long would it take for people to work out which ones are least patrolled (if at all)? What do victims of other crime say when there's cop cars trawling the streets but they feel like nothing was done for them? And, the most difficult of the problems, how much does it cost and where does that money come from? It just can't be implemented in any sort of universal fashion. Great idea for known problem spots but next to useless in general because they just can't be everywhere at once - a camera on the otherhand, they can be anywhere and that _should_ have us thinking about our actions at the very least. And for me, that's the real issue - we simply don't think about the effects of our actions beyond our own needs.


----------



## proudscum (26/6/11)

yardy said:


> Bastards..
> 
> where were they when scum broke into my house, no revenue in rounding up filth that break and enter :angry:




in all honesty i can say that i didnt do it.....but have had the same happen to me 8 times in the 23yrs living in oz.We even found out who did it on 2 occasions and the copper did SFA.


regards SCUM


----------



## Bribie G (26/6/11)

If you haven't done anything wrong, been a good citizen, paid your taxes, brought up your kids right and have obeyed the laws of the country then you have absolutely nothing to worry about.


----------



## bum (26/6/11)

DIDITROLLTHEMGOODGUYS?!


----------



## Bribie G (26/6/11)

bum said:


> DIDITROLLTHEMGOODGUYS?!



I prefer to troll newspapers 

Only got one bite so far


----------



## bum (26/6/11)

So what you're saying is that the Final Solution actually is comparable to a photograph of the back of your car when you know you're breaking a well known law?


----------



## thelastspud (26/6/11)

Back home in the Hawkesbury one of the local roads used to be a 80 zone, then some poor bloke/idiot going 130
managed to crash and kill himself, so they lowered the speed limit to 60.

I don't think someone who is going to drive 50kms above the speed limit is going worry much about 70kms above the speed limit.
I don't think the lower speed limit would have prevented this accident. Bad drivers are just bad drivers.

But now when you go 60 on this road people try to overtake you and its not a really great road for overtaking. 
So did they make the road safer or more dangerous with a 60 speed limit?


----------



## bum (26/6/11)

If those people were doing the speed limit? Yes, the road would be safer. Of course, I am more than willing to accept that most people don't but that is the central problem here rather than a compelling argument against regulation/punishment.

I don't know where Hawkesbury is but in Victoria (my main experience of traffic regulation) I do know that a single incident cannot possibly generate a change in a speed limit. First you need x amount of people to die to get a little "blackspot" sign put up, then x more people to die to think about putting in traffic lights or a round-about. Changing the speed limit? Bloody hell, I'd hate to think of how many deaths that might take.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (26/6/11)

Lucky, well for me, and many others, the NSW highway patrol do have some tolerance..

The Highway guys are not all that bad, depending on how you drive.

They will tolerate some speeding in the right conditions..

I have been flashed by oncoming HWP cars, somtimes they just wave the finger at me on the way past, but only when trafic is light and I am sitting on 110-120km

BUT... on the other hand I have been done doing 120km on the back road between Grafton and Casino...and was told... yep, you are the 5th bloke this morning

The guys are just doing there jobs. They hate speed cameras as well, but they also hate dickheads who think speeding is cool.

DISCLAIMER. I do contract work for the NSW Police... funny what you learn from them


----------



## thelastspud (27/6/11)

bum said:


> If those people were doing the speed limit? Yes, the road would be safer. Of course, I am more than willing to accept that most people don't but that is the central problem here rather than a compelling argument against regulation/punishment.
> 
> I don't know where Hawkesbury is but in Victoria (my main experience of traffic regulation) I do know that a single incident cannot possibly generate a change in a speed limit. First you need x amount of people to die to get a little "blackspot" sign put up, then x more people to die to think about putting in traffic lights or a round-about. Changing the speed limit? Bloody hell, I'd hate to think of how many deaths that might take.



Must be different in NSW I remember once the local paper sent a letter to the RTA saying that a road 
didn't meet the standards for a 100kmph road and the limit was changed within a week. 
(Damn Paper I thought they were supposed to report the news not make the news).

So maybe this road didn't make the criteria for a 80 road either. 
And your right if everyone did the speed limit there would be no need for speed cameras highway patrol or anything. 
people get frustrated at going slower than what they are used to, overtake dangerously or tailgate and lowering the speed limits
won't change that it'll just make more people frustrated and stupid.


----------



## pk.sax (27/6/11)

I saw someone mention how impossible it is to provide decent police presence on our roads...

Well, it's our problem. If we didn't insist on spreading our cities outwards all the time and actually embraced some higher concentration living we will have more cop presence, it happens in other places in the world. Funny how the CBD always manages to have cop cars hanging around. You wanna see cop cars around!!! People in oz hardly even talk to neighbours in suburbia, it's the I don't care about anybody but myself when I get outta work attitude. Suburbs are built remote for greater and greater privacy, making regular police presence harder.


----------



## goomboogo (27/6/11)

Not truly understanding the potential consequences of our actions allows us to naively justify our own recklessness, or more often, be completely blind to it.


----------



## Dave70 (27/6/11)

Whats going on?
Most other discussions on speed cameras slump into the inevitable non-sequitur at some point. Allow me to play devil's advocate.

Drinking cleans up around 3000 Aussies a year and costs the community in the order of 15 billion. Not to mention the lives it makes a misery of along the way.
Smoking kills around 6000. 
Road deaths are what, around 1800? and many of those are alcohol related anyway.

Drinking and smoking, both legal. 
Speeding, illegal. How odd..

As tax paying revenue generator's you'd think the government would be more interested in prolonging our lives via banning ciggies and grog than collecting a fistful of fines for people doing 65 in a 60 zone.


----------



## Kai (27/6/11)

TasChris said:


> I agree, its a voluntary tax that you can opt out of at any time. If you wish to contribute, keep speeding.
> 
> Cheers
> Chris



My problem with fixed or hidden cameras is they don't discriminate. When I pull out of my driveway, speed up, overshoot the limit by a few k's for a fraction of a second, take my foot off the pedal just in time to cop a two hundred dollar camera flash, I don't call that a fair and equitable way of improving road safety.


----------



## Airgead (27/6/11)

Bribie G said:


> If you haven't done anything wrong, been a good citizen, paid your taxes, brought up your kids right and have obeyed the laws of the country then you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
> 
> 
> View attachment 46666



Godwin's Law!


----------



## argon (27/6/11)

bum said:


> snip... In fact, as a younger bloke I was regularly copping fines from camera cars, got a bit tired of it and changed my behaviour. I _very much_ doubt I can be the only one in a similar position.
> 
> ...snip..



Precisely what happened to me... now i just drive at or below the speed limit. The 2-3mins I _may_ make up by driving at 10% or more above the limit instead of at the limit is just not worth the stress of either getting caught and fined, endangering myself and family... or having less time to deal with the large amount of inattentive oblivious imbeciles on the road.

If I ever get fined (which i haven't since modifying my behaviour)... it's because i was going faster than legislated... i cop it sweet. There's really no argument.

Anecdotally... when i was younger and driving like a dick, there seemed to be coppers and cameras everywhere... now i drive with more sensibility, i don't see them... probably because i don't need to be looking out for them.


----------



## bum (27/6/11)

Dave70 said:


> Drinking cleans up around 3000 Aussies a year and costs the community in the order of 15 billion. Not to mention the lives it makes a misery of along the way.
> Smoking kills around 6000.
> Road deaths are what, around 1800? and many of those are alcohol related anyway.
> 
> ...


I think a clear distinction here is that speeding has more capacity to harm others, the harm it causes is (arguably) more preventable due to its instantaneous damage (i.e one smoke won't wipe out your family) and stopping speeding doesn't outlaw the broader activity of driving while making the others illegal does (and banning driving would be a much larger problem than banning smoking (alcohol not mentioned for some strange reason?)). Also, I don't know what it is like Australia wide but the various Victorian governments of the last few years have been making some very unpopular laws about controlling smoking in public places so the impact on others is certainly something they are doing something about.

As for your last point, I think you'll find that they don't get to keep the tax money we pay so they don't actually look at us as cash-cows at all - they probably look at us as needy bitches who demand $10 spending for every $1 taxed.


----------



## bum (27/6/11)

Kai said:


> My problem with fixed or hidden cameras is they don't discriminate. When I pull out of my driveway, speed up, overshoot the limit by a few k's for a fraction of a second, take my foot off the pedal just in time to cop a two hundred dollar camera flash, I don't call that a fair and equitable way of improving road safety.


Where is your ability to discriminate? I'm sure all of us speed in this nature from time to time but I don't see how that makes it okay. You're speeding. You know the speed limit. What's the issue? You don't want to pay $200? They know that and that is why the cameras exist in the first place. There is nothing at all preventing you from doing under the speed limit in this scenario.


----------



## Dave70 (27/6/11)

bum said:


> Also, I don't know what it is like Australia wide but the various Victorian governments of the last few years have been making some very unpopular laws about controlling smoking in public places so the impact on others is certainly something they are doing something about.



Yep. NSW pubs and clubs have been making smokers feel like second class citizens for quite some time now by segregating them in purpose built areas.
These were basically just secure cages bolted to the pub the pub akin to cattle holding yards. 
But in order to win back their hearts, they've thoughtfully now equipped these area's with gaming facilities, draught beer and air conditioning so patrons can enjoy the cultural trifrecta of drinking, smoking _and _ gambling.


----------



## Kai (27/6/11)

bum said:


> is nothing at all preventing you from doing under the speed limit in this scenario.



Yes there was, the part where I accidentally overshoot the speed limit for a fraction of a second. That literally two heartbeats of time equates to a 200$ fine is draconian to say the least, and does nothing to make the roads safer. I drive responsibly already, the only part of my behaviour this could possibly change is more time spent staring at my speedometer and less at the road.

I accept that cameras are a compromise for road safety. That doesn't mean I have to believe they are perfect, or right all the time. Nothing is, really.


----------



## spog (1/7/11)

the state government here in south oz have increased road traffic fines as of today july the first.
not to make people safer,its because this state is financialy fucked,i drove back from whyalla today a spotted 5 radar cars of all types and discriptions gotta fix the states troubles some how.......cheers.....spog............


----------



## spog (1/7/11)

sorry forgot to add the distance is 260km 5 radars in that distance is a joke.........


----------



## seemax (1/7/11)

Maybe it is a joke, maybe not.

If there were no radars and no threat of radars many drivers would simply ignore the limit, which in most cases might be ok but it's the 1% that will end in tragedy.

As it has been said before, don't speed and you don't have to worry. 

The nanny state it may well be... BUT society on a whole loves to whinge and not act. If enough people rallied and made their voice heard things could be different in many aspects - just look at Getup!


----------



## yardy (1/7/11)

spog said:


> sorry forgot to add the distance is 260km 5 radars in that distance is a joke.........




I'm with you mate, obviously all the bullshit being spruiked here is by drivers who do the 30 minute commute. 'Don't speed and you won't have a problem', wow what ******* stop n go genius worked that out  

the point is, crime is on the rise and they install speed cameras, meth labs, burglaries, assaults blah blah blah and not a copper to be seen on the streets, drive from Gladstone to Bundy and you'll see more coppers than roadkill..


----------



## drew9242 (1/7/11)

Maybe we should fine people who get caught on CCTV giving a right hook to someone. Then we can all winge that the the government is just revenue raising.


----------



## bum (1/7/11)

yardy said:


> crime is on the rise


http://www.aic.gov.au/en/publications/curr...rime.aspx#rates


----------



## yardy (2/7/11)

nice link bum, check out the stats and graph for morons believing government bullshit.


----------



## bum (2/7/11)

Ah. I'll check Today Tonight next time.


----------



## yardy (2/7/11)

Don't you have Derryn Hinch on speed dial ?


----------



## bum (2/7/11)

Odd thing for the bloke writing his scripts to say.


----------



## yardy (2/7/11)

how's the stop and go traffic control career going, say hi to Warwick for us.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (2/7/11)

I'm 41, driving for 23 years - never had a speeding fine because I try as hard as I can to drive at or below the speed limit.

Don't speed and speed cameras are irrelevant - I don't even notice them.

There should be a speed camera every 100m as far as I am concerned, then only imbeciles would get speeding fines... mind you, I think that's mostly true already.


----------



## bum (2/7/11)

yardy said:


> how's the stop and go traffic control career going, say hi to Warwick for us.


Something wrong with traffic control?


----------



## drsmurto (2/7/11)

Thirsty Boy said:


> I'm 41, driving for 23 years - never had a speeding fine because I try as hard as I can to drive at or below the speed limit.
> 
> Don't speed and speed cameras are irrelevant - I don't even notice them.
> 
> There should be a speed camera every 100m as far as I am concerned, then only imbeciles would get speeding fines... mind you, I think that's mostly true already.



It really is that simple.

You can argue all you like about revenue raising, crime rates, safety issues but the simple fact of the matter is that if you acknowledge that the speed limit is in fact a limit and not the minimum speed then the money stays in your pocket. Regardless of whether you know better. Regardless of whether the speed used to be higher. Rocket science it isn't. If you fail to understand this most basic of logic then why are you driving in the first place? It is more basic than breathing. A kindergarten child understands this level of logic.

Like TB, I'd like to see speed cameras every 100m but with the technology that detects the distance between cars since most people fail to understand the concept of a safe braking distance (i do the speed limit and have cars up my arse because of it) as well as fining drivers for not having their lights on in fog or rain or overcast conditions. I swear 90+% of drivers on the road think their headlights are for them to see in the middle of the night rather than increasing their visibility to other drivers.

And my pet hate, people using their mobiles when driving. These people should be shot. Point blank. There is no excuse for it.


----------



## TasChris (2/7/11)

yardy said:


> I'm with you mate, obviously all the bullshit being spruiked here is by drivers who do the 30 minute commute. 'Don't speed and you won't have a problem', wow what ******* stop n go genius worked that out
> 
> the point is, crime is on the rise and they install speed cameras, meth labs, burglaries, assaults blah blah blah and not a copper to be seen on the streets, drive from Gladstone to Bundy and you'll see more coppers than roadkill..






yardy said:


> nice link bum, check out the stats and graph for morons believing government bullshit.






yardy said:


> Don't you have Derryn Hinch on speed dial ?






yardy said:


> how's the stop and go traffic control career going, say hi to Warwick for us.




Some quality post there Yardy. Not up to your normal helpful and informative level
Chris


----------



## yardy (2/7/11)

thanks chris :icon_cheers: 

my point and pet hate is spending money on raising revenue and none spent on reducing the amount of meth labs, pensioners punched in the face for a few dollars, kids being abducted in broad daylight etc

yes, tb and doc, it's not ******* rocket science, i personally don't speed but did get done and wore it on the chin, '09 / '10 financial year i did over 50,000 km driving all over Qld for work, the total was 1 failure to wear a seat belt and one point lost for 110kmh.. so my rant is not that of a disgruntled driver but that of a pissed off taxpayer.

just in the region i live there has been a huge increase in labs, assaults etc, I believe the money would be better spent on a higher police presence on the streets rather than a static camera that's a licence to print money, it's not ******* rocket science.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (3/7/11)

yardy said:


> thanks chris :icon_cheers:
> 
> my point and pet hate is spending money on raising revenue and none spent on reducing the amount of meth labs, pensioners punched in the face for a few dollars, kids being abducted in broad daylight etc
> 
> ...



Fair enough


----------



## goomboogo (3/7/11)

yardy said:


> thanks chris :icon_cheers:
> 
> just in the region i live there has been a huge increase in labs, assaults etc, I believe the money would be better spent on a higher police presence on the streets rather than a static camera that's a licence to print money, it's not ******* rocket science.



What if the camera revenue was spent directly on providing an increased police presence in the public? This is just a question and by no means a claim that this actually happens.

People don't get upset by the by the existence of speed cameras but rather the claims by government officials as to the purpose of the cameras. Using Queensland as an example, there would be far less objection if the Bligh Government stated they were increasing the number of speed cameras because it has been shown to be a cost-effective means of generating revenue. There would be even less objection if the revenue was shown to be directly returned to the departments responsible for roads and policing.

For some people, knowing the truth is enough. For others, they want to hear those responsible actually tell the truth.


----------



## drsmurto (3/7/11)

yardy said:


> thanks chris :icon_cheers:
> 
> my point and pet hate is spending money on raising revenue and none spent on reducing the amount of meth labs, pensioners punched in the face for a few dollars, kids being abducted in broad daylight etc
> 
> ...



Ok yardy, and i do agree with your points on other areas that need policing.


----------



## TasChris (3/7/11)

yardy said:


> thanks chris :icon_cheers:
> 
> my point and pet hate is spending money on raising revenue and none spent on reducing the amount of meth labs, pensioners punched in the face for a few dollars, kids being abducted in broad daylight etc
> 
> ...


Fair enough, you do make some good points. The system of financing what areas is very rooted, sqeeky wheel always gets the grease especially if there is votes and money in it
I am about to go to a meeting about the closure of local primary school. A school whicg has been given 2 million in state and federal grants in last 18months then they decide to close it...MM could have used that money better
Cheers
Chris


----------



## pk.sax (3/7/11)

Bastards got me yesterday right before the 80 zone starts. Tere is a main set of lights at the end of town and for some funny reason they have the 80 limit starting just a pinch after that, perfect to plant a motorcycle cop to nab people.

I've not seen a single cop in the Cairns CBD itself trying to police drivers where the chance of hitting a pedestrian is actually higher. Yet, they sit just outside the city and try to catch people getting away for the weekend. It IS a money grab.


----------



## brettprevans (7/7/11)

Well got my first ticket (speed camera) in 10yrs last week on the night my 3rd kid was born. Fkn spewing. I'm ringing them and asking for a warning. It was under 10kph so I might get the warning


----------



## drew9242 (7/7/11)

citymorgue2 said:


> Well got my first ticket (speed camera) in 10yrs last week on the night my 3rd kid was born. Fkn spewing. I'm ringing them and asking for a warning. It was under 10kph so I might get the warning



They might not even send you a fine. I have been flashed about 3 times and only got a fine for one of them. Otherwise I have a perfect driving record for 8 years. So you might be lucky.

Edit: Reread your post and you proably got the fine already. :wacko:


----------



## brettprevans (7/7/11)

Drew9242 said:


> They might not even send you a fine. I have been flashed about 3 times and only got a fine for one of them. Otherwise I have a perfect driving record for 8 years. So you might be lucky.
> 
> Edit: Reread your post and you proably got the fine already. :wacko:


lol. the fine came through. but then again the car is in my wifes name, so it would have been her record they were looking at, not mine. shes had a few in the last few years.


----------



## Peteoz77 (7/7/11)

There was a new speed camera installed on the road that my wife takes home from work... it was there for over 6 months, and she drove past it every day. Then they announced on the radio that it was to be switched on (after 6 months) and of course she didn't hear about it.

Well a week later she gets FIVE speeding tickets in the mail in ONE day, a Friday. Teh follwing Friday she gets two more. I tried to argue with the Traffic Authority, but got nowhere. I said "If she had been ticketed by a police officer, she would have ONE ticket, not SEVEN. She did not realise that she was being ticketed." I Also said "If you had sent the tickets the day after they were issued, she would have at the most THREE tickets, but she had no idea she was being fined until she already had SEVEN tickets"

No luck... they said "If she wasn't speeding, she would not have received any fines. Never mind that the speed limit was reduced at the same time the camera was installed.

$1800 later the fines were paid, and fortunately we live in another state.. so she didn't lose her license.

Revenue Raising I says!


----------



## bum (7/7/11)

So you didn't raise your voice to your wife at the time? You know because none of that was her fault?


----------



## peaky (7/7/11)

Peteoz77 said:


> Well a week later she gets FIVE speeding tickets in the mail in ONE day, a Friday.



Similar thing happened to me. Got home from work one day and found 4 tickets in the mail from a new speed camera set up not far from my house. I was already on good behaviour so I got 6 months disqualified. Fair enough, I was speeding.

Funny thing, the camera was set up close to a school and heaps of the mums picking up their kids lost their licences as did the teachers!

Hope they all learned their lessons, I sure did. (pun intended)


----------



## Peteoz77 (7/7/11)

bum said:


> So you didn't raise your voice to your wife at the time? You know because none of that was her fault?




Like that would have made any difference.. :lol: LOL


----------



## bum (7/7/11)

Ha! Fair call.


----------



## pk.sax (9/7/11)

All these speed cameras do is make people find another stretch to speed on tonmake up for lost time. The boss isn't gonna cut you slack because a camera got put on your route :S I really don't think they made any of you a safer driver around bad spots where there isn't a camera....
Much as I hate mobile cameras because they always set up to nab people - not regulate them, at least they make everyone try to be speed conscious everywhere.


----------



## [email protected] (19/7/11)

I fully agree with both sides. Of course this is revenue raising, and yes we do ask for it, the police only are digging the gold mine we provide.
As said earlier all we have to do is the limit or less. I did more than 3 1/2 years on the road for work and a lot of km in this time, I only got busted once (114 k in 100 k zone, could have been $110 and 3 points, but a good cop, all he did was give me a caution). Both the other guys that I worked with have lost their license by not taking their tickets to heart.



what I do disagree with is when a stretch of road is say 80 km/h and gets changed to 60 km and the police are all over it like never before. Yes it did need to be reduced (as the area was getting built up) but I think there should be a law that if a speed change occurs then fines (not warnings) can only be handed out after a given time frame (Humans are a creature of habit).



In Tasmania they are using end of speed limits so this means you have to know the max speed for the road youre on 50,60,70,80,90,100,110 could be any of them. Why dont they just tell you?



As for Victoria I dont see how any equipment can be good enough to work with only a 3km/h tolerance. 3/110 = 2.7%. if my calculations are correct then this is 825mm/sec increase at 110km/h.



If it was really this much if an issue, then think of all the millions that could have been invested in a system where by a transmitter at each speed sign post transmits a signal that all car and truck etc can receive which in turn this sets the max speed possible without an over ride, say you put ya foot flat or push a button on the dash. I think this would take out all question if apprehended. But only if there was a way to make sure the radars were reset before the offender was to leave the scene of crime.



If they expect you to reduce youre speed to the limit youre approaching before you pass the sign then surely the same goes for increasing youre speed.


----------



## komodo (22/7/11)

I've been done for speeding that many times I pretty much have a direct debit to civic compliance.
I got my first ticket for speeding within 10 days of obtaining my P's towing a boat coming into Ararat. (Funny you arent allowed to tow on your Ls but get your Ps and start towing a boat, van what ever with no supervision...) 
I've been clocked a few times for having a heavy right boot including doing 140 in an 80 zone. I did my time on two feet and a heart beat and I realise that at times I have been known to drive dangerously - particularly when I was younger and had a car full of mates. I wouldnt think anything of it to rip up the hand brake at 60+kph to drop a u-banger in traffic with 3 mates in the car. Yep sure its was dangerous - but I wasnt speeding...

I pay attention to the road though not my speedo. I have two crashes - one was rolling a 4wd on a badly corigated road at under 30kph where the car was thrown off the road and into a spoon drain. The other was a car in front took off then slammed on the brakes at a give way interstection - I was looking to my right and creeping up to the intersection - yep both my fault and I've learned from both crashes. 

Im so paranoid about getting flashed on eastlink here in melbourne with their 50 billion speed cameras and continual hwy patrol that I avoid the ******* thing. When I do go on it my missus is continually at me about paying attention to the road because I wander all over the road cause Im so concerned about speeding. You could EASILY do 140+kph on this road safely but most of the time everyone is on 90kph cause everyone is so shit scared of getting flashed.
I do an average of 1000ks per week which for someone who doesnt drive for a living or live in a remote location is a reasonable amount of ks. 

I have a great deal of doubt that speeding causes crashes. I believe that concentration lapses (mostly due to fatigue), boredom, poor vehicle maintenance and drivers driving beyond their ability cause more accidents than speed. Then there are the drivers under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol. I'd put my lefty on more crashes happen because of people getting too close to the vehicle in front. 
People blame too many crashes cause by dangerous driving on speed - there is a MASSIVE difference. 
You can do 60kph in a 60kph zone and be driving dangerously - not driving to the conditions etc. NO speed camera will get you for this. But you can be doing 140kph on the hume with no traffic around cruising along and you'll get flashed - but your alert, driving to the conditions etc. I'd be my arse that the guy driving dangerously but within the speed limit is more likely to have a crash or hit someone than the bloke cruising along @140kph on the freeway. 
I'd bet more accidents are caused by people falling asleep at the wheel etc than by doing 140 up the freeway. As for the arguement that not all vehicles can do 140 on a freeway safely - get the pieces of shit off the road! Obviously there are some vintage vehicles that cant do such speeds but most of those drivers would be more content taking the back roads and going through the towns that are bypassed by freeways. 

I DONT like speed cameras - they DONT change a drivers state of mind/attitude. You get pulled up by a police officer and you know you've done the wrong thing and you become concious of your speed. You get done by a speed camera and you dont even realise for 10+ days. You dont change your driving habbit/attitude you get a letter in the mail and you just get pissed off with revenue raising. 
You watch places where known fixed speed cameras are. BANG every on is on the brakes then back on the gas 50 meters up the road. This upsets the flow of traffic and leads to more nose to tail accidents. 
What about the bloke and his missus driving along in their VC commodore with rust everywhere a bent tail shaft, leaking hub seals and unbalanced unroadworthy tyres. Even doing the speed limit he is fricken dangerous and if he does have a car the structural intergrity of the car is likely so bad that all the vehicles occupants will be killed even in a fairly low speed impact. 

Obviously I realise that speed cameras give the ability to police more areas than would be possible using TMU vehicles and officers but fixed cameras are a wank.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (22/7/11)

can't believe I just read all of that.


----------



## TasChris (22/7/11)

TasChris said:


> I agree, its a voluntary tax that you can opt out of at any time. If you wish to contribute, keep speeding.
> 
> Cheers
> Chris


 Thanks TasChris you smart arse. Where were you and your clever retorts on Monday when I got done for speeding, not so clever then,were you!!

Cheers Chris


----------



## yardy (22/7/11)

my karma just ran over your dogma :icon_cheers:


----------



## TasChris (22/7/11)

yardy said:


> my karma just ran over your dogma :icon_cheers:


At speed!!

At 114 km in a 100km/h zone the fine is only $110 fine and 2 points in Tas, better than most states.

Cheers
Chris


----------



## Thirsty Boy (23/7/11)

Komodo said:


> I've been done for speeding that many times I pretty much have a direct debit to civic compliance.
> I got my first ticket for speeding within 10 days of obtaining my P's towing a boat coming into Ararat. (Funny you arent allowed to tow on your Ls but get your Ps and start towing a boat, van what ever with no supervision...)
> I've been clocked a few times for having a heavy right boot including doing 140 in an 80 zone. I did my time on two feet and a heart beat and I realise that at times I have been known to drive dangerously - particularly when I was younger and had a car full of mates. I wouldnt think anything of it to rip up the hand brake at 60+kph to drop a u-banger in traffic with 3 mates in the car. Yep sure its was dangerous - but I wasnt speeding...
> 
> ...



Mate, if you are by your own admission incapable of driving in a coherrent fashion and simultaneously paying attention to how fast you are going, then you are so shit a driver that the sooner you get your next series if fines and are removed from the road, the better I'll feel about myself and the people I care about being on that road. The problem with the road laws isn't speed limits and cameras to enforce them - its that people like you are allowed to have a license in the first place.


----------



## pk.sax (23/7/11)

Besides bla bla bla... I can bet half a left nut that if you put a majority of Aussies that drive on our freeways on some of the better freeway systems around the world that allow higher speeds, they would be damn dangerous because they don't ever learn how to handle a vehicle at above 120 km/h (max) over any distance.

Yes indeed, most speedsters out there scare me. They just don't have the practice of driving at those speeds properly, they do it in a) panic B) boredom c) hurry etc.... None of which are safe.

For the extreme reliance we have on our roads to get anywhere, we have really crappy training systems backed up by a majorly punitive road law system, bad new car purchase scene (with insurance costs for newly licensed drivers, except for aami...) and roads that should be in a lot of cases signed higher speed than they are because the legal limit kicks in and then the local police find it funny that they can exploit that for revenue rather than concentrate on more real safety issues.


----------



## komodo (25/7/11)

So let me get this straight TB Your saying that someone who gets flashed at 106kph in a 100kph zone on a 4 lane toll road is a menace? Remembering that untill 2003 the ADRs stated that speedos could have upto a 10% error Thats since been changed and speedos can only now read that your travelling faster than you actually are - but there are plenty of pre 2003 vehicles on the road. 

Dont get me wrong when I was younger - yes I was. But then you have to look at driver training etc. I'd been driving since I was 13 years old so I had shed loads of confidence. Problem with current driving tests is that basically thats all they are a confidence test. If you can confidently do a 3 point turn and drive a manual car in light traffic - here you go heres your licence.

I learnt WAY more doing a 1 day murcotts driver training course than I learnt in 2 years having my learners. The only thing I wish is that I'd done the murcotts course earlier (ie before I got my Ps) as the information that was taught there would have made me a much safer driver. Im not talking about the actual driver training - because really to a certain degree that is a bit of wank. No the theory side of things is really where the lessons are. Real world statistics drummed into you in an environment where you cant just "flick the channel". 

The other thing is that (And I dont know if things have changed with the introduction of green P's here in vic) that P plate drivers should be given an instant suspension. When I did my P's I had 12 points to play with and I had a reasonable paying job. couple of points here few $ there what did I care? I know they have since changed it to 5 points in 12 months however I still think this is too leanient. 

I deserved to loose my licence when I did - and I'll be honest I've learned my lesson. I don't blatantly speed, Im not dropping handbrake turns, ripping skids etc. Things that proper driver training would possibly have swayed me from doing. That said - boys will be boys. Especially those of us who have grown up around cars (I had my first car before I could drive). Also vicroads should IMO encourage people to get CAMS licences etc and provide information on how to go about having legal fun in cars. Indicate that public roads arent the place to be working out your reaction times and quater mile times - save it for the track with information on where tracks are located and how you go about getting your car down the quater. 

In saying that I do think that fixed speed cameras on freeways are bollocks. Red light cameras - yes, fixed speed cameras in residential and built up areas - yes, distance over time cameras - no, mobile speed cameras - yes. Fixed speed cameras on freeways are NOT a safety device they are purely revenue raising. Sure they dont raise revenue when you dont speed - but when your doing a trip from say frankston to stringvale road along eastlink sitting on 100kph as best you can on undulating roads (I'm sorry I dont have cruise control - and at near $1800 to have a decent kit retrofitted which still wont stop the vehicle running away on down hill stretches I'm not interested in fitting it) and you get flashed doing 106kph coming under the dandenong bypass thats bullshit straight out. I would much rather the drivers around me be paying attention to the road than making sure they are "bang on" the speed limit. 

The other thing is how many of us have been on a free way realised that the exit we need is coming up but we're in the right lane - the left lane is clear in front but there is a car next to you and several care behind both in your lane and the two left lanes. You dont brake and mess up the flow of traffic - you give the right peddal the boot and get across. Oh shit you just got flash for cashed at 111kph by a fixed speed camera... 
Now tell me whats more dangerous - stoming on the loud pedal for 150-200 meters and keeping the flow of traffic going. OR slowing down all traffic trying to merge into a full lane pissing people behind you off cause they dont know what your doing and they jump into another lane driving past you giving you a mouth full?

The last speeding infringement I got was done at 66kph in an area where they have recently dropped the speed limit from 80 down to 60. Thats the first infringement I've had in 2+ years the one before that was 85kph in a roadworks zone with a reduced (from 100) limit of 80 kph - at 2am with no road works going at the time. Yes in both instances I was actually in the wrong and deserved the fines I recieved. In neither case would I suggest I was a "menace" just simple acts of a.) not slowing down fast enough for a revised speed limit. b.) being negligent at 2am and letting my reduced speed creep back up. The officer that pulled me up even commented on the fact that I had slowed to the correct speed limit but slowly increased my speed through the reduced limit area. Shit happens I paid my $140odd fine and I'm more cautious in reduced limit areas (more than I can say for a lot of drivers who seem to have a love affair with high beams and horns in such areas...). These are perfect examples of how cameras and TMU work effectively. Fixed speed cameras on freeways DO NOT WORK at reducing the road toll and improving traffic safety. 

Have you ever done any long distance driving? Melbourne to darwin? melbourne to perth etc? you cant honestly think Im going to believe that you sat "johnny on the limit" the whole way and didn't at all get tempted at all to just slightly push a little harder on that right pedal? I know last time I drove to perth I sat on pretty much 110-120kph the whole time and I even passed some hwy patrol vehicles at the upper of these speeds. Difference being that the hwy patrol guys take a note of if what you are doing is actually dangerous or not - something a speed camera cannot do. If I was doing 120kph and overtaking everything in site with oncomming traffic I have no doubt those guys would book me. But open road with no one in sight either direction they know the biggest danger to me or anyone else on the road is hitting wild camels or big roos or tourists driving on the wrong side of the road (  ).

There is a difference between someone "innocently" exceeding the speed limit slightly and someone blatantly speeding &/or driving dangerously. 
Of course everyone is entitiled to their opinion and thats mine


----------



## Thirsty Boy (26/7/11)

No, in dont think that someone who gets the occasional speeding fine for minorly exceeding the speed limit is a menace, thats not what i said. I said that if you are so bad a driver that you are unable to both maintain a speed within the limit and simultaneoudly drive in a safe manner... That makes you a menace.

"Im so paranoid about getting flashed on eastlink here in melbourne with their 50 billion speed cameras and continual hwy patrol that I avoid the ******* thing. When I do go on it my missus is continually at me about paying attention to the road because I wander all over the road cause Im so concerned about speeding." 

And as quoted above, you said quite clearly that you weren't capable of that. Anyone who even comes close to being skilled enough to be considered a good driver, can do easily what you say you cannot do. Otherwise you certainly are confident about your driving ability, and so is every single abysmally bad driver i have ever encountered.

Everyone does 90 on eastlink because they are scared of getting a fine for speeding huh? ... But you also say quite clearly that fixed speed cameras are incapable of changing people's mindset... And then provide us with an excellent example of speed cameras doing exactly what they are supposed to do - causing everyone to drive at below the speed limit.

Your problems with speed cameras seem to mostly stem from your inability to control your car and its speed correctly - perhaps you working on that might be a more practicable solution than changing the laws to accomodate your lack of skill.


----------



## Clutch (26/7/11)

Just buy a motorbike with an Eclipseplate.*







*I actually don't advocate this. Really.


----------



## Pennywise (26/7/11)

The speed argument is pointless, the main point (IMO) is that everyone else on the road is not expecting you to fly by them at 160+ k's an hour, THAT is the dangerous part, not how fast YOU"RE going, but what others on the road are expecting, you to follow the laws of the road. I reckon the speed laws are there because they know how many useless pricks are on the road, and most of them simple can't handle a car at any speed, let alone 100+, FFS, half of them can't even turn a ******* corner properly.


----------



## Malted (26/7/11)

Pennywise said:


> FFS, half of them can't even turn a ******* corner properly.



Man that shits me how so many people must think that staying in their lane is optional! The problem is I reckon these sort of people just don't think at all.


----------



## komodo (26/7/11)

^Exactly. 
If the freeways were 140 and every one was doing 140 there would be no issue. But when the freeway is 100 kph and someone comes flying up at 140 people are making lane change decisions based on the flow of traffic being 95-<105kph. Obviously you wouldnt make suburban freeways 140kph but major interstate links like the hume could easily carry traffic at 140 kph. From memory these days on the hume you dont even pass through a town at all this side of the boarder. 

If the fixed speed cameras were set at say 115ks (on 100kph motorways) but there were regular TMU patrol cars with mobile radar you would get better public response - and likely make a bigger impact. Someone doing 160 up the freeway isnt concerned about a few speeding fines - they know when they get done its minimum 12 months (way to lenient IMO).
Seriously up the fines for all I care $140 is a piss in the ocean really comparitive to the cost of care for someone in the alfred etc - make them $300+ but put a bigger TMU presence out there! 
People could plod along at 100kph with no fear that if their vehicle runs away down a hill or they get a touch heavy on the gas they are goin to get fined. You'd still get the drivers blatantly speeding with the speed cameras and the regular TMU presence would actually make an impact and the TMU officers can make a practical decision to weather the driver they just locked on was speeding or just trying to travel safely out of the way of other road users. 
A bit of driver education one chosing the correct lane to travel in might be handy too - and how to merge on to a motorway, it freaks me out how many people still almost come to a stop to get onto a freeway - Victoria would have to be the worst state of all that I've travelled to for this (I've not been to QLD so I cant comment). Approach the motorway on the on ramp pick your merge point and drive into it at the speed of the traffic flow - its not rocket science! Yet how many freeway crashes happen at freeway entrances... 

The other problem with cameras is how many of us have been asked to take someone elses points for a couple of hundred bucks? You can't do that when an officer pulls you up.
Also Twelve points is also a LOT of points. Thats 12 offences over 3 years at 3-9kph over the limit. Even then you just get a 6 or 12 month "good behavious bond" Thats a lot of blokes crossing the road with a pizza getting messed up. Should be some kind of scale where a one off incident at 3-9kph is 1 point a second offence in 12 months is 3 points etc. 10-17 (i think thats the next break?) should be 3 points for a one off incident then 30 day suspension of licence. 17-25kph 30 day suspension second offence in twelve months 3 month suspension. if no second offence is recorded in the 12 months then it reverts back to the minimum again. 
You'd make a way bigger impact on the road toll / safety awareness by inconveniencing people than your $1540 worth of 11x $140 one point fines over 3 years is ever going to make.


----------



## komodo (26/7/11)

Malted said:


> Man that shits me how so many people must think that staying in their lane is optional! The problem is I reckon these sort of people just don't think at all.



Pfft bikes on the reefton spur are the worst. I've not got one 'yet', but dads got two - both realising they are too hot around the corner dropping their bikes - one smashed a mag wheel on his rangie classic to pieces. Another mate got one dropped his bike into my mates trailer snapped a beam axle. Save it for the track boys. I've come across a few where a bunch of guys are picking up a mate whos dropped a bike. I realise accidents happen - but fark!


----------



## pk.sax (26/7/11)

Malted said:


> Man that shits me how so many people must think that staying in their lane is optional! The problem is I reckon these sort of people just don't think at all.


hahahaha.. more people I know would turn into the next lane than do a controlled tight right hand turn at the lights. Lets not even talk about Left hand turns at any speed whatsoever if there isn't a slip lane. Majority of people just do it dead slow and do not increase their revs through the turn to maintain momentum. Pretty much a joke how it is, they could ditch that extra year of P's in favour of compulsory driving skill training (the kind taught in advanced driving courses) at the end of your L's, would teach people to handle and control their cars a bit better, weed out some of the itchy nervous types.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (26/7/11)

I give every speed camera the forks, just in case they get me.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (26/7/11)

I got up to 110kph on the back rd to coffs.... does this mean I should be dead cause I went over 100kph, and speeding will kill me


----------



## drsmurto (26/7/11)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> I got up to 110kph on the back rd to coffs.... does this mean I should be dead cause I went over 100kph, and speeding will kill me



It increases the chances. Hence speed limits. :icon_cheers:


----------



## Zizzle (27/7/11)

DrSmurto said:


> It increases the chances. Hence speed limits. :icon_cheers:



So does drinking, so we should all stop that too right?


----------



## Pollux (27/7/11)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> I got up to 110kph on the back rd to coffs.... does this mean I should be dead cause I went over 100kph, and speeding will kill me



I hit 60km/h in a 50 zone at 3am driving to work the other morning.............It's a miracle I survived.....


----------



## komodo (27/7/11)

Whats the criteria for setting speed limits? There are some god aweful single lane roads that are 100kph and some brilliant multilane roads that are 70kph?
Then theres things like major link roads that remain unsealed with no signed limit (ie 100kph - though most of the time you'd be lucky to see 60kph because of the condition of the road) 
And now the monash where it used to be 100kph almost the whole way upto the tunnel is now down to 80 and regularly down to 60 even though all the widening road works are completed?


----------



## Goofinder (27/7/11)

Komodo said:


> A bit of driver education one chosing the correct lane to travel in might be handy too - and how to merge on to a motorway, it freaks me out how many people still almost come to a stop to get onto a freeway - Victoria would have to be the worst state of all that I've travelled to for this (I've not been to QLD so I cant comment). Approach the motorway on the on ramp pick your merge point and drive into it at the speed of the traffic flow - its not rocket science! Yet how many freeway crashes happen at freeway entrances...


Have you not been to SA? I've seen people come to a complete stop at the very end of the on ramp on a 110 km/h freeway. Not just slowed down, actually stopped. Around Adelaide at intersections with long slip lanes (enough to get up to 80 km/h easily) it's standard practice to drive to the end, stop, then pull out when the lights have gone red and stopped the traffic coming past. No one moves over if there's someone trying to merge and the right lane is free. I can't imagine what it would be like if we had more than 2.5 freeways here.


----------



## Dave70 (27/7/11)

Happy?

http://smh.drive.com.au/roads-and-traffic/...0727-1hzcz.html


----------



## Malted (27/7/11)

Goofinder said:


> Have you not been to SA? I've seen people come to a complete stop at the very end of the on ramp on a 110 km/h freeway. Not just slowed down, actually stopped. Around Adelaide at intersections with long slip lanes (enough to get up to 80 km/h easily) it's standard practice to drive to the end, stop, then pull out when the lights have gone red and stopped the traffic coming past. No one moves over if there's someone trying to merge and the right lane is free. I can't imagine what it would be like if we had more than 2.5 freeways here.



Yeah yeah funny as shit isn't it!


----------



## pk.sax (27/7/11)

Speed and time are relative 

Ride to work


----------



## Shed101 (27/7/11)

Komodo said:


> Whats the criteria for setting speed limits?



Australian Standard AS 1742.4, Manual of Uniform traffic Control Devices, Part 4: Speed Controls, 1999.

Buy a copy.


----------



## Leigh (28/7/11)

practicalfool said:


> Speed and time are relative
> 
> Ride to work



But per capita, more cyclists are injured or killed per year than motorists. Ban cyclists I say


----------



## brettprevans (28/7/11)

citymorgue2 said:


> Well got my first ticket (speed camera) in 10yrs last week on the night my 3rd kid was born. Fkn spewing. I'm ringing them and asking for a warning. It was under 10kph so I might get the warning


well being in Victoria I spoke with the Civic Compliance office and they said told me that there are several criteria of gertting out of speeding fines. As my last demerit offence was over 2 years ago (it was actually 10 yr ago), I was eligible for a warning. All I had to do it write to the Pentalty Review board at Vic Police, admit to the offence and ask them for a warning becuse of that criteria and it woud, be fine.

For those in Victoria here are some useful links. 

SP Hardy Traffic Lawyer - http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/fines.html
Victoria Police - http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=10367


----------



## pk.sax (28/7/11)

Leigh said:


> But per capita, more cyclists are injured or killed per year than motorists. Ban cyclists I say


Blasphemy!!!
Cyclists are not entitled to the road because they don't pay rego. Their statistics don't matter for road safety cuz they don't exist on roads 

On another thought, maybe we should switch to flying microlights to work until the cops figure out a way to fine that!

PS: qld transport is a joke.


----------



## Pennywise (28/7/11)

practicalfool said:


> Cyclists are not entitled to the road because they don't pay rego.



Damn fuckin straight


----------



## spog (28/7/11)

lycra coated speed hump's....wankers..........cheers..spog......


Pennywise said:


> Damn fuckin straight


----------



## Zizzle (29/7/11)

spog said:


> lycra coated speed hump's....wankers..........cheers..spog......



Lol, because a few extra seconds saved on your car drive is more valuable than human life.


----------



## Leigh (29/7/11)

Zizzle said:


> Lol, because a few extra seconds saved on your car drive is more valuable than human life.



Most of the cyclists seem to think so...


----------



## komodo (29/7/11)

http://www.woj.com.au/2006/08/29/melb-pede...ings-hell-ride/ 

The nepean hwy / beach road is hell for anyone other than the lycra brigade. 

But there are heaps of cyclists that arent endangering other road users that get lobbed in the basket. Plenty of riders up aroung wang, bright, myrtleford, rutherglen etc that do the right thing and IMO are entitled to their use of the road. 
Its the cock knocks on beach road and around the CBD that collect people, hold onto vehicles driving, weave in and out of traffic, ignore traffic management signals, ride on the road and on the path as it suits etc that are the issue.


----------



## Malted (29/7/11)

spog said:


> lycra coated speed hump's....wankers..........cheers..spog......




Yeah feckin lycra brigade. They get up to the line at the lights and don't want to put a foot on the ground so they do that whole slow moving /balancing thing that makes them wobble all over the place and makes them likely to get collected by someone chucking a turn left at any time with care (or hold up the bus that has pulled up behind them and theyre doing the wobble thing in the bus lane the feckin buses annoy me too). Or they just keep creeping out into the intersection and are often halfway into it by the time the lights go green. And when I am waiting to turn left, with my indicator on, they pull up at the line to my left, reach out and hang onto the traffic light post. When the light goes green I have to wait for them to go straight ahead before I can turn left. Most 'normal' cyclists are ok, it just seems that the lycra brigade tend to take a few unnecessary risks.


----------



## Malted (29/7/11)

Komodo said:


> http://www.woj.com.au/2006/08/29/melb-pede...ings-hell-ride/


But you can get done for DUI on a bicycle can't you?


----------



## warra48 (29/7/11)

Malted said:


> But you can get done for DUI on a bicycle can't you?



Yup, you can, and also riding a horse.


----------



## TasChris (29/7/11)

Malted said:


> Yeah feckin lycra brigade. They get up to the line at the lights and don't want to put a foot on the ground so they do that whole slow moving /balancing thing that makes them wobble all over the place and makes them likely to get collected by someone chucking a turn left at any time with care (or hold up the bus that has pulled up behind them and theyre doing the wobble thing in the bus lane the feckin buses annoy me too). Or they just keep creeping out into the intersection and are often halfway into it by the time the lights go green. And when I am waiting to turn left, with my indicator on, they pull up at the line to my left, reach out and hang onto the traffic light post. When the light goes green I have to wait for them to go straight ahead before I can turn left. Most 'normal' cyclists are ok, it just seems that the lycra brigade tend to take a few unnecessary risks.



I have always wanted to run over and shove 'em to the ground when they do the " Look Mum no feet" routine


----------



## Malted (29/7/11)

warra48 said:


> Yup, you can, and also riding a horse.



That's what I thought.
But not charged for causing someones death whilst riding a bicycle? From the link "A police source said the rider could not be charged with culpable driving because he was not behind the wheel of a car."

I vote for a Lycra Tax!


----------



## Liam_snorkel (29/7/11)

does the horse have to be drunk?


----------



## Pollux (29/7/11)

You can however drive a ride on mower drunk...........One of the locals where I grew up starting doing this after he lost his license for DUI. Local cops tried to stop him but couldn't find a law that enabled them to.


----------



## manticle (29/7/11)

Pollux said:


> You can however drive a ride on mower drunk...........One of the locals where I grew up starting doing this after he lost his license for DUI. Local cops tried to stop him but couldn't find a law that enabled them to.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (29/7/11)

Pollux said:


> You can however drive a ride on mower drunk...........One of the locals where I grew up starting doing this after he lost his license for DUI. Local cops tried to stop him but couldn't find a law that enabled them to.




In NSW you can be done on a lawnmower or golf cart. If it is on a public road, then it must be licensed or have a permit. The only motorised vehicles that do not need to be registered are those under 50cc ( approx) . Not only will you be done for DUI, but also not registered and uninsured 

You can actually register a lawnmower or golf cart to be used on the road. Just about any motorised vehicle can be permitted to be used on the road.They reason you can register a lawn mower is if you need to mow along the edge of the road, as the road also includes the grass verge. Its just legal bullshit really, in case you hit someone, or they hit you.


----------



## warra48 (29/7/11)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> In NSW you can be done on a lawnmower or golf cart. If it is on a public road, then it must be licensed or have a permit. The only motorised vehicles that do not need to be registered are those under 50cc ( approx) . Not only will you be done for DUI, but also not registered and uninsured
> 
> You can actually register a lawnmower or golf cart to be used on the road. Just about any motorised vehicle can be permitted to be used on the road.They reason you can register a lawn mower is if you need to mow along the edge of the road, as the road also includes the grass verge. Its just legal bullshit really, in case you hit someone, or they hit you.



To drive these sorts of vehicles on a public road, you need to have "Conditional Registration". It doesn't give you a rego number as we know it, but does give you the protection of CTP Insurance. There will be some conditions to be met, such as lights etc, depending on the type of vehicle. A number of golf carts at my club are registered on this basis, as the owners live near by, and ride the carts to the course on public roads. Another instance is for farm machinery moving from one part of a property to another across or along public roads.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (29/7/11)

Correct Warra

All council lawnmowers have rego/permits that allow them to mow the verges and be on public roads legally

The NSW RTA has a large ( read HUGE ) list of permisable vehicles . Tractors/ Headers/Agricultural equip, golf carts, fire trucks, earthmoving equipment,cranes, lawn mowers... you name it, they have a class of registration for it.

Of course most of them have restrictions, which is only fair, but if you take the time to ask, you can get nearly anything registered/permitted.

And yes, in NSW you can be charged with being in control of a horse drunk on a public road :icon_cheers:


----------



## Pollux (29/7/11)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> In NSW you can be done on a lawnmower or golf cart. If it is on a public road, then it must be licensed or have a permit. The only motorised vehicles that do not need to be registered are those under 50cc ( approx) . Not only will you be done for DUI, but also not registered and uninsured
> 
> You can actually register a lawnmower or golf cart to be used on the road. Just about any motorised vehicle can be permitted to be used on the road.They reason you can register a lawn mower is if you need to mow along the edge of the road, as the road also includes the grass verge. Its just legal bullshit really, in case you hit someone, or they hit you.




But not if you cut across everyone's front lawn........


----------



## pk.sax (29/7/11)

I love the wobbly thing  Its just fun. Saves the hassle of dismounting and mounitng again if you read the light soon enough. IF you drive an automatic car and complain about cyclists doing the wobbly thing, you effin hypocrite... I hate all you automatic drivers that think its their right to drive start stop through my commute, go get stuffed.

But then again, I ride a fixie. I ride up to the light and skid to a stop on the LINE. fyi, can't do the wobbly thing if skid stopped (locked rear wheel with pedal power), almost neccesiates a dismount cause of change in momentum.

The lycra brigade is annoying tho.... they always ride clipless shoes and hate getting out of them. Ol fashioned clip riders don't mind properly dismounting so much, but its so damn hard to find decent shoes that can be ridden with SS clips and have a stiff enough sole to give the power transmission equivalent of clipless pedal/shoe combos....
I think what car drivers actually hate is seeing the same cyclist draw up at every signal in dense city traffic when they are stuck in the traffic, and most likely, the cyclist gets out of the traffic quicker. Yes, I love breathing your stinkin exhaust at every signal too, maybe you could let someone else draw up at the head of the column so I can have some variety 

One thing I notice with lycra clad crowd is the lack of signalling... wtf they thing they are!!!! I swear I've nearly run a few down on my pushie because they didn't signal they were gonna turn. I've never worn lycra (well, I lie.. my wetsuit is lycra ), but I'm told its comfortable... sometimes I consider it.... But then...

PS: I suppose can't get booked for riding drunk either if you do it across everybody's front lawns


----------



## Zizzle (30/7/11)

Too many fat lazy ignorant gits for this to happen in Aus 



6 billion people should be entitled to a gas guzzler to get down to the local MacDonalds drive through right?


----------



## pk.sax (30/7/11)

Zizzle said:


> Too many fat lazy ignorant gits for this to happen in Aus
> 
> 
> 
> 6 billion people should be entitled to a gas guzzler to get down to the local MacDonalds drive through right?




Lol, I petitioned my work to allow a flexible start to work (it's not shift work - office people) to look into the fact that unless you drive to work your commute time can vary a lot. No dice, fat lazy ignorant asses are dead scared of change. They dragged up chamber of commerce and whatnot into it to finally say that adult workers should be able to work it out themselves :S so much for helping change some culture. Haha.

I remember when I worked in Germany, work had a flexible day - ~1/2 to 1 hour either way flexible and almost everybody either rode or walked to work. Even in winter some braved it. They didn't really have the sort of bike lanes in this video in that town either.


----------



## komodo (1/8/11)

^Flexitime for the win!
We have relitively flexitime in the office - provided you are in the office between 9:30 and 4:30 and make up your total hours your good to come in at what ever time and leave at what ever time before and after. Means some of our guys will come in early and leave late then the next day just caut it fine both ends etc.
Means if your running late to work (I try to be in the office at 9 - although my day starts @ 7 when my boys show up to site) its no stress and if you have something on in the evening you can shoot off a bit earlier than usual.

Our boys in the work shop are much the same but their hours at 7:30 - 4. but most of them get in at 6am and work till 5 meaning that they do 2 hours over time every day without really noticing it. 
Same for them if they have a doctors appointment or something they can duck off early plus they asked to have a half day off every week rather than a full day RDO so they knock off at 12 on a friday each week meaning they can head away early for the weekend etc. 

Sure its not overly flexible - there is still some contraints but it certainly gives a bit of flexibility. 
Worst employer I had was a stickler for being to work bang on time. For me that ment I left home at 8am to be at the office by 8:50am if I left at 7:30 I'd be there by 8:35. 7am I'd be there by 8:20. its was shit house - the later I left the better run to work I would get so I just used to get in at 8:50 - but if there was a traffic jam for what ever reason I might be a few minutes late used to piss the boss off but I wasnt going to sit in a car longer than I have to just to get in to work a few minute early. I was doing 50+ hour weeks as an office junior as it was


----------

