Speed Cameras

[RobF (Rob)]

I've always found the concept of a speed limit interesting ever since I learned to drive and had to survive amongst everyone doing limit + 8 km/hr.

If we were all serious about it, and the limits were reasonable, why don't they just put 3G speed transponders on every car? I guess we will eventually, after a serious of politically correct tightenings of the law...

Somone told me today there will soon be digital speed cameras that time your passage between Point A and point B to determine if you're speeding. Anyone heard that one?

[Jules76 (Julian)]

The only digital speed cameras I know of are the one's coming to QLD as reported not long ago in the Courier Mail. Apparently they are going to be more accurate therefore they are looking to lower the speed tolerance level which will result in catching more drivers. Apparently it's only 3km over the limit in Vic?

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...90-952,00.html

As a side note, take notice of the small article just below it about Speedos. Funny thing is, this article came out just days after I was pulled over by a Policeman who claimed I was doing 80km/h in a 60km/h zone which was totally false. I'm always careful to watch my speedo and as I told the cop, it was definately reading 60 (which was backed up by my workmate who was in the car at the time), and it just happened I looked at it moments before I even saw him in my rear vision mirror.

Of course he had no proof, flimsy evidence at best. His assumption I was speeding was based on him coming from a stop start off a side road and having to speed up from at least 200m away (according to my workmate). Well of course he had to go 80+ to catch me 200m away going 60.

Anyway to cut a long story short, he blamed my speedo being out. Yeah sure, a 4 year old car's speedo is out by 20km/h.

[Gallifreyboy]

Traffic lights used to be simple
green - go
red - stop
amber - go faster

I hope it stays that way over here

[Louwai (Bryan)]

Originally Posted by mithrandir

It's nothing to do with that, Bryan. People on bikes are automatically better targets for cops and courts.

And I don't ride any more. After spending several weeks in hospital, and two operations after I came off it, SWMBO v1 insisted the bike go. SWMBO v2 is of the same opinion.

Fair enough. I've been lucky. Only 1 off in 20yrs & it was nothing to do with me. I was hit from behind on the freeway. Pricks..... Can't even see what's in front of them let alone beside or behind........

[Louwai (Bryan)]

Originally Posted by Jules76

The only digital speed cameras I know of are the one's coming to QLD as reported not long ago in the Courier Mail. Apparently they are going to be more accurate therefore they are looking to lower the speed tolerance level which will result in catching more drivers. Apparently it's only 3km over the limit in Vic?

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...90-952,00.html

As a side note, take notice of the small article just below it about Speedos. Funny thing is, this article came out just days after I was pulled over by a Policeman who claimed I was doing 80km/h in a 60km/h zone which was totally false. I'm always careful to watch my speedo and as I told the cop, it was definately reading 60 (which was backed up by my workmate who was in the car at the time), and it just happened I looked at it moments before I even saw him in my rear vision mirror.

Of course he had no proof, flimsy evidence at best. His assumption I was speeding was based on him coming from a stop start off a side road and having to speed up from at least 200m away (according to my workmate). Well of course he had to go 80+ to catch me 200m away going 60.

Anyway to cut a long story short, he blamed my speedo being out. Yeah sure, a 4 year old car's speedo is out by 20km/h.

No vehicle manufacturer will guarantee their speedo accuracy better than 10%. + different tire diameters will also throw the accuracy out.
So really, dropping the "tollerance" to 3 or less klm/hr will only clog up the courts with people contesting their fines.

I drive a 2007 Honda Legend. I know for a fact that the speedo reads 10klm/hr faster than I am actually moving when travelling at 100klm/hr.
So I should NEVER be booked for speeding.


My partner is a sales rep on the road all day every day (in the Honda). She NEVER speeds as losing her licence would be losing her job.
The other day she got a ticket for doing 90 in a 70 zone. That means that the speedo would have to be reading 100klm/hr. There is no way she would have been doing 100 in a 70 zone.
She may possibly have had a lapse of cencentration, but I doubt it.
Buggered if I know how the coppers can get away it.........

[michaellxv (Michael)]

Originally Posted by RobF

Somone told me today there will soon be digital speed cameras that time your passage between Point A and point B to determine if you're speeding. Anyone heard that one?

They already have this and use it for long haul trucks. Only a matter of time before they start using it on cars. When they were first introduced they found quite a few trailers with the same rego in different states at the same time.

[that_guy (Tony)]

why is it cool to suddenly accelerate when people are near by for hoons??

[Jen]

jen takes notes DO NOT GO THROUGH AMBER LIGHTS
What that movie Starman (i think) when he says yellow light means go faster

[Louwai (Bryan)]

Originally Posted by Jen

jen takes notes DO NOT GO THROUGH AMBER LIGHTS

Growing wise with age I see.......

[Baddad (Marty)]

Originally Posted by RobF

I've always
Somone told me today there will soon be digital speed cameras that time your passage between Point A and point B to determine if you're speeding. Anyone heard that one?

Hi Rob,

The A to B points speed recording is to be covert. Anna Bligh has stated this. The average speed will be recorded by the device. Also a host of hidden cameras and unmarked police cars are being introduced onto Qld roads.
Currently all cameras are clearly marked. Anyone getting caught deserves the fine. Obviously not paying due attention to their driving. "Nuff Said".

Cheers Marty

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

... The fact that it was wet (a road weather alert had been issued) and I had a P-Plater tailgating my car helped as well.

Yeah I forgot that case: when the road is wet. In most cases when doing the speed limit there's absolutely no chance you're going to stop the car before that red light. Better get flashed on amber than die skidding in the middle of a wet intersection with a car pile up behind you and on-coming traffic from the sides.

[Ric]

Amber lights terrify me as a motorbike rider.

I have lost count at the number of times that I have slowed down for the amber light only to have the idiot behind me simply swerve around and keep going.

The problem is that because I'm on a bike they don't even bother to change lanes and usually miss my side by inches.

The most interesting one was a few years back when a lady did precisely this and went around me through a red light (I'm convinced to this day that I felt the car brush my leg) only to plough into a car which was crossing the intersection.

After applying first aid to the said lady and the other cars occupants, the lady then abused me for stopping suddenly and said it my fault the accident happened and that she would be sending me the insurance bill.

I gave my statement to the Police and obviously nothing came of her threats.

[multiweb (Marc)]

That's scary!

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

Car driver (non bike riders) have 4 metal sidewall to provide flexibilty to flaut traffice rules. I have copped it many time.

[Jules76 (Julian)]

Originally Posted by Baddad

Hi Rob,

The A to B points speed recording is to be covert. Anna Bligh has stated this. The average speed will be recorded by the device. Also a host of hidden cameras and unmarked police cars are being introduced onto Qld roads.
Currently all cameras are clearly marked. Anyone getting caught deserves the fine. Obviously not paying due attention to their driving. "Nuff Said".

Cheers Marty

You know, I use to think like that. That's until I got caught by a radar for the first time in over 10 years of what I considered safe driving, about 3 or 4 months ago.

The way I got done was by a green van hidden on a median strip behind a row of trees that was around a corner and downhill. "Currently all cameras are clearly marked", absolutely NOT. In fact the "speed camera in use" sign was only a couple of metres in front of the van and impossible to see unless you were going the other way or had x-ray vision to see through all the trees, around the corner and through the van. Not to mention the van is purposely green to help camoflauge it amongst the trees.

Yeah they are all clearly marked.

Was I not paying enough attention to my driving? Absolutely not. On this downhill corner, it is absolutely VITAL you pay attention to the road and surroundings because there is an unmarked pedestrian/bike crossing at the bottom of the hill. Had I been more worried about watching my speedo instead of the road and applying more pressure on my brakes than I did, I wouldn't of crept over the limit at just the right time for the camera. That was my only fault.

Did I deserve it? I don't think so, no. I wasn't hooning or otherwise driving recklessly. I was paying full attention to the road conditions and all I did wrong was to not put enough pressure on the brakes because I was too busy focusing on the road and the pediastrian crossing, which I know is in a horrible position as I've been on it a few times myself on my bike.

This and being pulled over (again for the first time driving) a couple of weeks ago by an over-zealous cop, who falsely accused me of going 20km/h over the speed limit based on flimsy guesswork, makes me question what the motives of QLD police are. To actually keep the roads safe? Or try and take every opportunity, no matter right or wrong, to catch motorists out to keep the politicians happy and the money flowing. I'm not as cynical as most people to believe that 100%, but it's becoming harder and harder to ignore. Especially with all these "new" hidden cameras they are bringing in, and the possible lowering of the tolerance to 3km/h over.

[erick (Eric)]

"Victoria's top traffic policeman, Ken Lay, has apologised publicly after being caught driving 10 km/h over the legal speed limit. Mr Lay, the deputy commissioner for road policing, said in a newspaper column that he discovered his lapse when he received a letter saying a speed camera had ''snapped'' him travelling at 80 km/h in a 70 km/h zone.
He said his fine and loss of three demerit points was his first penalty notice in 35 years' driving."


http://www.theage.com.au/national/ke...0114-maan.html

[AndrewJ]

He said his fine and loss of three demerit points was his first penalty notice in 35 years' driving."

And listening to Aunty this morning, he apparently knew about it well before Xmas, yet still came on the idiot box etc telling us all not to speed.
He reasoned that it would ruin his message if people knew he had just been booked.
Forgive me but thats just plain hypocritical.
Why not do what the govt does and get professional spin doctors in
to bleat out the message.
They could even have used
"dont be a bloody idiot like Ken here" in the campaign.
At least we know we are being lied to when spin doctors present it.

Andrew

[erick (Eric)]

I could image a suitable advert. He shows us his letter, admits he was exceeding the limit, shows that the law applies to everyone, then takes us to the location and gives us good logical reason why the speed limit where he was "booked" should be 70km/h rather than the 80km/h he was travelling at. If the reasons are believable, that may have some effect on the viewer.

[Louwai (Bryan)]

This was a letter to the Editor from an ex policeman, published in the Gold Coast Sun newspaper.

Quote:
ONCE again we witnessed the horrific death toll on our roads over the Christmas period.

As an ex-trafic police officer I ask myself 'when are the politicians and bureaucrats going to realise that all their band-aid treatments have been a total failure?'

Their ideas seem to be more directed at detection and punishment of offenders rather than prevention.

Drivers cause collisions; there are no accidents. They run off roads, hit trees, lose control of their vehicles etc.

Speed, drink, drugs or whatever are secondary to the cause ... important symptoms but not the cause.

No one should be able to teach a person to drive other than a licensed driving instructor, qualified to teach a common system of safe driving (recommend the system used in police driver training.)

We should develop regional training centres equipped with a skid pan, driving simulators and eye-testing facilities to include tests to detect colour blindness.

Examination for a driving licence must be more comprehensive and should include driving at speeds up to 110 km/h, night-driving in poor weather conditions on country roads and on freeways.

Once passed as competent, L and P plates should be abolished.

The second stage of driver education should be through the courts, where instead of a tap on the wrist or paltry fine, traffic offenders may be fined and sentenced to special training at the offender's cost. [I think this may happen in some states in the USA, according to an episode of Malcolm in the Middle I saw recently.]

In cases of drink-driving, why is it necessary to even have a court case with all the associated cost and time consuming trials? If a perosn is deemed over the limit as a result of tests - straight to jail.

The community can no longer keep bearing the ever increasing cost of road trauma.

We have reached the time for some thinking beyond the square and it is high time the decision makers faced the fact that, so far, they have failed miserably to make any progress in solving the problems.
- PETER BROOKE, Mudgeeraba

End of quote.