Is talking about speed limits banned yet?

[pgc hunter]

Peter Ward and Rat156 for Premier and transport minister please.

Problem here though is that we only have one highway that is anywhere near Autobahn standards, that's the Hume from Melb to Syd and even that is extremely poor qualitity in a few sections..i.e. between Cragieburn and Beveridge and there are still some single lane sections in NSW. 130-140km/h limit on the Vic section and in parts of NSW would work well though. Besides that there really are next to no roads here where one could safely travel at speeds much above 100kmh.

The existing 100-110 is perfectly good for most of the poor quality 1 lane roads we have here.

At the end of the day, when it comes to road and rail, Australia is bordering on 3rd world, but you can't expect much when you have only 12-15 million taxpayers in an area the size of the USA, you aren't going to have autobahns.

[Alchemy (Clive)]

THE ARTICLE AND THE DISCUSSION IS NOT ABOUT THE MERITS, OR OTHERWISE OF SPEEDING!!!!!!

Sorry my misunderstanding, You should have chosen a different title

Is talking about speed limits banned yet ?

It kind of opened the door.

[GrampianStars (Rob)]

Wow had to get out a map and see what country I was living in 2day.
I am truely overwhelmed with amazement the same number of members here
who always pontificate their antiquated socialist views
and shoot down, and interference with others vote given right to free association, and actions!

[rat156]

Originally Posted by Alchemy

Sorry my misunderstanding, You should have chosen a different title



It kind of opened the door.

I'm sorry if this comes out like a personal attack on Clive, it's really not meant that way, but it's the only way I can express it here. For "you", please read anyone with the "Speed Kills" mentality.

No Clive, it clearly states in both the title and the article we (I) wanted to discuss speed LIMITS, not speeding.

This is the same blinkeredness that perpetuates all the jingoistic rubbish the RTAs and Vicroads of our country shove down our throats. If you open your mind and read the article you will gain from it the concept that you can travel at speeds well above 100 or 110kmh on well made roads and this makes driving safer. That is what I was getting at. If we don't open the discussion on this and vent our opinion at our local representative in parliament, then we will all be traveling much slower in the future, as it's "obviously" safer to do so if you accept that "Speed Kills". This also means that funding better spent on other road safety initiatives is diverted, we end up with crappy roads with poor safety around fixed obstacles.

This is also the same attitude that labels me as a hoon for wanting to go faster. People with this attitude read the first couple of sentences say "Oh it's one of those hoons that wants to go flat out everywhere" and then dismisses (or in some cases clearly doesn't read) the rest of the article. Well, I, for one, am not like that. Yes, I'd like to go faster on some roads, but like many people here I drive a nice safe car and on the appropriate road under the appropriate conditions it would be much safer for me to do 130 than 110 kmh. I drive the stretch of the Hume from Winton to Melbourne quite often, I almost always have to stop at Seymour to wake myself up. I drove from Darwin to Katherine and back earlier this year, very straight, quite boring road, but at 130 kmh (posted speed limit), much, much easier to drive.

Now, for the rest of you that can't work out the School zones thing. If you don't know what the speed limit is because you don't know if the kids are in school or not, then do 40 anyway. Warning, science content... traveling at 50 kmh over a distance of 500 m, OK I'll give you 1 km, just to be on the safe side (this would be the distance traveled going through a school zone) takes 72 seconds (50000/3600=13.8888 m/s, 1000/13.8888=72 s), doing 40 through the same school zone takes 90 seconds (11.111 m/s, 1000/11.1111=90 s). Is the 18 seconds worth it? It's probably 9 seconds anyway, as most school zones are around 500 m long. Same argument for roadworks speed limits.

Cheers
Stuart

[mithrandir (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by supernova1965

The government would get no money from anyone if everyone stopped speeding which is the aim of the fines so if the fines stopped people they would not be revenue raising. Penalties are not imposed to encourage and action but to discourage it.

If all they are trying to do is improve road safety then remove the automatic fines and keep the demerits. That would quickly demonstrate the real commitment was to safety. Anyone doing something really stupid (some of those 200Kmh+ on the Hume/M2/M4/M5/M7 idiots) could still wind up in court with fines and possibly jail.

The federal government already takes enough money from fuel excise to make up the loss to the states.

For most people who are detected speeding the monetary fine does not matter. Losing their license is the important bit. It can cost them their livelihood.

I drive the stretch of the Hume from Winton to Melbourne quite often, I almost always have to stop at Seymour to wake myself up.

Agreed. I've reached the point where 3 hours of driving boredom on the Hume or Pacific Hwy puts me to sleep. Sane limits on the divided and limited access sections of both those would mean I would have arrived where I was headed by then.

Andrew

[casstony]

While there are some very annoying issues related to speed limits and speeding fines, focussing on them is not likely to result in changed laws so I think it's something we just have to be Zen about (although not too Zen while driving).

When I get upset from an encounter with a radar camera or a narky driver I try to think of the important things in life and remember that this incident was not one of them.(kids, family, friends, food, shelter, health, sunshine, flora, fauna).

Being able to separate the wheat from the chaff in life is a valuable skill, one that I'm far from mastering. As Mister Miyagi says: Sun is warm, grass is green.

[Lee]

Originally Posted by mithrandir

.....
Agreed. I've reached the point where 3 hours of driving boredom on the Hume or Pacific Hwy puts me to sleep. Sane limits on the divided and limited access sections of both those would mean I would have arrived where I was headed by then.

Interstate driving is always a bore, would you be less bored driving at 130 or more.... I doubt it. Just means a microsleep will kill you faster.

[taxman (Matt)]

Originally Posted by Lee

Just means a microsleep will kill you faster.

Like the difference between 2 hand grenades or 3? 100km/hr is still ~27 meters per second, which is a pretty rough stop.

[telemarker (Keith)]

I see a lot of rants against the faceless "bureaucrats" or "they" or some such straw man to put to the sword. Try talking to those crash fatality investigators, not just the ambos or cops who pick up the pieces, who have an input to policy and you'll get an indication of why speeding together with alcohol is regarded as a problem. There seems to be a general attitude that doing 5-10k over the limit is OK as long as you don't get caught. I see cameras as "their" means to change that attitude.

To address the points in the quoted article of the original post, he states that:
- speeds should be reduced in urban areas
- aussies are generally crap drivers
- increase the limits on autobahn style roads
Not much to argue against there - except why let poor drivers go faster and we have no autobahn style roads outside of the cities?

[AstralTraveller (David)]

Originally Posted by mithrandir

Agreed. I've reached the point where 3 hours of driving boredom on the Hume or Pacific Hwy puts me to sleep. Sane limits on the divided and limited access sections of both those would mean I would have arrived where I was headed by then.

Andrew

I think it is pretty well accepted that 3 hours behind the wheel is too much for anyone. I can see little mistakes creep into my wife's driving after about 1.5 hours. I think I'm good for 2h (perhaps 2.5h on a good day) but 3h is too much for me. It isn't bordom, it is fatigue. I do a fair amount of back country driving where boredom certainly isn't the issue and even there 2h is a good stint. It's amazing how much difference 10-15 minutes out of the car makes.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Maybe our driving licence system should provide an incentive for good drivers and penalise harder the bad ones, so this way we don't 'pay' for the hoons. If you clock another year without speeding offence or accident then your speed limit gets increased. If you incur any kind of offence it goes down. Maybe linked to the point systems. You've got 12 you can do the speed limit, you've got 6 you're back to P, 3 left back to L regime. You don't want to learn, you walk.

[Alchemy (Clive)]

I'm sorry if this comes out like a personal attack on Clive, it's really not meant that way, but it's the only way I can express it here. For "you", please read anyone with the "Speed Kills" mentality.

No Clive, it clearly states in both the title and the article we (I) wanted to discuss speed LIMITS, not speeding.

No offense taken, it's clearly a hot topic

So to the original premise, we will not get higher limits on freeway/ autobahn style roads, due as clearly discussed.... The mantra of speed kills.
Should one ever be introduced, the first serious accident will be blamed on speed, which amounts to political suicide.

Causes of accidents are in the following order

1 stupidity, this can be speeding, poorly maintained vehicles, phones etc etc
2 poor roads, plenty around with potholes, poor cambers, unmaintained surfaces etc
3 bad luck, a kangaroo comes through the windscreen, a blowout on what was a perfectly good tyre, etc etc

Due to the prime cause, stupidity, we all fall to the lowest common denometer, and rules are applied accordingly.

As for a system to outlaw stupidity...... Cant be done.
Unlicensed drivers still drive, drunks are still on the road..... Etc etc

Going to leave this thread alone from here on.

[Barrykgerdes]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Maybe our driving licence system should provide an incentive for good drivers and penalise harder the bad ones, so this way we don't 'pay' for the hoons. If you clock another year without speeding offence or accident then your speed limit gets increased. If you incur any kind of offence it goes down. Maybe linked to the point systems. You've got 12 you can do the speed limit, you've got 6 you're back to P, 3 left back to L regime. You don't want to learn, you walk.

Hi Marc
Yes that has been suggested but I would also want good points redeemable for cash. Say $50 for every 4 years of good driving. I haven't had a speeding ticket since 1985

I am not the one to talk about driving periods. I got used to driving up to 4, 4.5 hr stretches in 24 hrs. The breaks at each 4.5 hrs were for fuel and a quick bite to eat. About 10 mins. I don't drive that much these days .

I had a 6.5 hr drive to Narrabri (600k) last week with just the one stop for fuel and a bite to eat, Returning the next day at the same rate. I keep to the speed limits (just a wee bit over) but I do notice that most go past me and the fastest drivers always seem to have P plates.

I used to love going fast. In the days before 100K speed limits I did one trip from Toowoomba to Narrabri 260 miles at an average speed of 96 MPH, Max speed reached was 118MPH and I slowed to the 35 MPH limit at Goondawindi, Boggabilla and Moree.

Poor driving skills and habits (as well as going too fast for the conditions) are the cause of most problems, not exceeding the speed limit.

Barry

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by Alchemy

As for a system to outlaw stupidity...... Cant be done.

Beg to differ. Our (car) licensing system is a joke.

There is no divine right for everyone who asks to be given a license (after paying an appropriate fee) to drive a tonne or two of metal an any speed.

Bear in mind (NSW) Learners are banned from going above 80km/hr which hardly disposes them to operating in a free-flowing 110km environment with everyone else.

We have all seen examples of people who are clearly challenged drivers at any speed.

All drivers should have skid pan time, high speed time, taught to keep to the left, plus some first aid, emergency braking and avoidance training.

What tests do we do??. Potter at 40-50km/hr around the block, do a hill start and reverse park. Pay your $150 and remember don't be in such a hurry. Duh.

We are breeding a race of speedometer watchers who falsely believe as long as they don't go above the posted limit (a random number at best) all is well. I prefer to look outside to gauge & go with the flow, see threats and avoid them.

I can honestly say the only times I've come close to grief have been when I didn't see or couldn't see a threat.

Eyes on a speedo are by definition not eyes on the road.

[Roobi]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

Beg to differ. Our (car) licensing system is a joke.


We have all seen examples of people who are clearly challenged drivers at any speed.

All drivers should have skid pan time, high speed time, taught to keep to the left, plus some first aid, emergency braking and avoidance training.

Definatly some good points here. I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that we don't have enough training when we start out, and then nothing thereafter. Sometimes people doing 80 in a hundred zone in the right lane of a freeway are just as dangerous as the crazy speeders. Not to just pinpoint older drivers, but i think as well as having much better beginner training, defensive driving courses and such, we should all have to sit a test every 5 yrs or so once we reach a certain age as eyesight and reaction times obviously slow down as we get old. (i dont mean like 30... more like 60 yrs) My own mum needs to stop driving, or get better glasses, but she refuses to listen to anyone on the subject and thinks theres no problem at all.

[Osirisra (Ken)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

Beg to differ. Our (car) licensing system is a joke.

There is no divine right for everyone who asks to be given a license (after paying an appropriate fee) to drive a tonne or two of metal an any speed.

Bear in mind (NSW) Learners are banned from going above 80km/hr which hardly disposes them to operating in a free-flowing 110km environment with everyone else.

We have all seen examples of people who are clearly challenged drivers at any speed.

All drivers should have skid pan time, high speed time, taught to keep to the left, plus some first aid, emergency braking and avoidance training.

What tests do we do??. Potter at 40-50km/hr around the block, do a hill start and reverse park. Pay your $150 and remember don't be in such a hurry. Duh.

We are breeding a race of speedometer watchers who falsely believe as long as they don't go above the posted limit (a random number at best) all is well. I prefer to look outside to gauge & go with the flow, see threats and avoid them.

I can honestly say the only times I've come close to grief have been when I didn't see or couldn't see a threat.

Eyes on a speedo are by definition not eyes on the road.

So true. And to add, after we give them a license and they are 'caught' for being a idiot for excess speeding, drinking/drugs or being a dumbass hoon we just slap them on the wrist and let em go again.

Better roads and better drivers that is what is needed. A pilot dosen't just get shown where the pedals are, pay a fee and then jump in a plane and take off. Nor do they take of and land on tarmac that looks like the surface of the moon.

[Osirisra (Ken)]

This is on todays West Australian.

One of WA's worst speeding drivers is set to be back behind the wheel less than four months after he was caught driving his Subaru Liberty at 164km/h, more than 110km/h over the speed limit.
Aaron Peter Hassall, 20, was granted an extraordinary driver's licence in the Busselton Magistrate's Court on Tuesday to allow him to work as a driver for a local hardware business.
Hassall had pleaded guilty in August to reckless driving after he was caught driving at 164km/h in a 50km/h zone in Margaret River on July 26, for which he was fined $1500 and disqualified from driving for 12 months.
Magistrate Richard Bayley granted him an MR truck licence for work purposes only.
In evidence, Hassall, a first-offender, said he had recently got his car back after it was impounded but intended to sell it.
Defence lawyer Michael Laurino said his client knew the offence had been serious and the speed was "well and truly excessive".
He said Hassall would lose his job if he was not able to drive.
"He made one very foolish mistake, but should prove his colours and not lose his job," Mr Laurino said.
Police prosecutor Greg Ward objected to the licence application and said Hassall was "too immature" for his driver's licence and the speed he was caught at had been alarming.
Mr Bayley said though the offence could have had devastating consequences and was an "utterly irresponsible act" Hassall would experience a considerable degree of hardship if he did not maintain his job.
The magistrate granted the truck licence to be used between 7.30am and 5pm and only for work purposes within a 100km radius of the Margaret River post office.
Insp. Bill Munnee would not be drawn on Hassall's case yesterday but police are understood to be disappointed with the ruling.
Police Minister Rob Johnson said he was "deeply concerned" that anyone caught driving 110km/h over the limit should get an extraordinary licence.
Transport Minister Simon O'Brien said the State Government was in the process of tightening laws to make it more difficult to for people to obtain extraordinary driver's licences.



I rest my case!

[AstralTraveller (David)]

I hope this doesn't come across the wrong way but another issue with licensing is that we have drivers on our roads who are driving on overseas licenses obtained in places where the testing is, to say the least, inadequate. I know of a case (admittedly some years ago) where someone thought the appropriate way to obtain an Australian license was to hand over the paperwork with a few $50 notes. When they were told that they would have to do a test they said 'oh I see' and handed over a few more. Luckily for them they weren't charged. Their academic supervisor was contacted and told to come and collect the person and explain how things work in this country.

It is an open secret that some students have overseas licenses obtained in exactly that way. Some of the 'driving' I've seen suggests the 'driver' has never had a lesson. A few months ago I observed a neighbour get a friend to back their car 5m down a wide driveway, presumable because they couldn't, and then drive off into the traffic. It is no wonder there is not a straight panel on that car.

Luckily the number of such cases on our roads is quite small (most overseas students I see are competent drivers) but that is no reason to sweep it under the carpet. However I don't know that I have a good solution. Allowing drivers with overseas licenses on our roads in normally part of a reciprocal arrangement that allows Australians travelling overseas to drive. Can you imagine the outcry if suddenly no one could drive overseas unless they obtained a local license? Alternatively, can you imagine the political row if we said we would accept licenses from country X but not Y?

[casstony]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

All drivers should have skid pan time, high speed time, taught to keep to the left, plus some first aid, emergency braking and avoidance training.
.

Good idea, but those skills need to be practiced repeatedely over a period of time to enable the driver to react automatically in an emergency situation. Young country folk can practice on isolated gravel roads, disused gravel pits, wet clay, etc, but I don't know how city folk could get their skills up to scratch.

[rat156]

Originally Posted by Osirisra

This is on todays West Australian.

Snip...

I rest my case!

Again, this thread is NOT about speeding, or the merits or otherwise thereof. It's about upping the speed limits on appropriate roads. Again, someone doing 110kmh over the speed limit abviously doesn't care what the posted limit is. This guy should have had his licence cancelled forever, regardless of the hardship caused by this action, no argument.

No case to rest I'm sorry, this is superfluous to the discussion.

Cheers
Stuart