Login
|
xr6greg
Post #106
QUOTE (wolfman101 @ Jun 6 2014, 04:19 PM)  I still question the motivation between choosing to hide a camera, have the hoon pass through, not realise they have been pinged and kill granny down the road in the high risk area vs having it signed, and forcing the hoon to slow down through the high risk area. Seems counter intuitive to me. I'm not complaining about the act-speeding is speeding. If you can be pinged you SHOULD be. It's how it's represented to the public that bothers me. I believe that if road safety was the highest priority that almost all cameras would be fixed. Yep. Well said wolfman101. HP Plod. I'm with you and your duties. No issue on pinging anybody who can't do the right thing ... How come we NEVER see speed camera's at work sites? How come, if school Xing's are such a concern (and we both know there are no genuine concerns at schools), we NEVER see speed camera's there? How come they are always set up on high traffic volume roads where the offence of follow too close (layman's terms) is the BIGGEST contributing factor to injury accidents? |
|---|
5th June 2014 - 10:59 PM
 |
MJ80
Post #107
Also to add that cameras are also placed in sneaky or "c**t" places purely to catch people ever so slightly slipping over 50 or 60kms p/h at the bottlm of slight declines or on super open large roads that the "natural" or logical or sensible speed would be MUCH higher, say 70-80kms compared to 60. 90% of the time when i see a cop with radar they are in a really c**t place thats not dangerous or a hoon hotspot, its some where that people are easily going to slip over the limit, and thats NOT a huge crime its not f'king dangerous to slip over the lmit a bit here and there, i do it all day every day not because im hooning or being a dick, it just happens and it happens to EVERYONE even cops ! but you can count on them being there to catch you doing that totally human thing and ever so slightly drifting over the limit, thats what i find. |
|---|
 |
HP Plod
Post #108
QUOTE (xr6greg @ Jun 6 2014, 04:59 PM) Yep. Well said wolfman101. HP Plod. I'm with you and your duties. No issue on pinging anybody who can't do the right thing ... How come we NEVER see speed camera's at work sites? How come, if school Xing's are such a concern (and we both know there are no genuine concerns at schools), we NEVER see speed camera's there? How come they are always set up on high traffic volume roads where the offence of follow too close (layman's terms) is the BIGGEST contributing factor to injury accidents? All trucams are to be used predominantly in school zones, so you won't see them as they are covert.. This was our directive when they came into circulation. You can't put a speed camera in a roadwork site as the camera is deployed when we log onto the computer and ask for a deployment schedule, we have three sites to choose from. These sites are surveyed, studied, measured etcand then sent on for approval before they are used. They are not just stop the camera and set up here. The camera has to be deployed and set up within a tolerance of 50mm of parallel from a set point, gutter, verge line etc. We are employed by councils to work lidar at roadworks on special duty every now and then. We are also tasked based on complaints at roadworks. I understand that you say it doesn't seem right to speed get pinged and not know about it till much later, this will then hopefully slow you down. The concept of speed cameras is to make people aware of their speed as they don't know where they are when they'll be or what they'll be in, but we have those that are completely clueless to how they travel on a road. |
|---|
 |
wolfman101
Post #109
Understand the concept plod, just dispute the efficacy. I believe that hidden cameras prioritise revenue over safety. |
|---|
|
|
HP Plod
Post #110
QUOTE (wolfman101 @ Jun 6 2014, 05:41 PM) Understand the concept plod, just dispute the efficacy. I believe that hidden cameras prioritise revenue over safety. There are cameras that are being trialled that are able to detect seatbelt, mobile phone and other distracting offences... If they are hidden will they too be damned to hell? |
|---|
 |
FCdrifter
Post #111
must be the trucam i have seen being used around brendale, its just a single officer sitting in an unmarked new pajero with the device in his hand. i was wondering what he was doing. obviously they dont need any signage? |
|---|
|
|
wolfman101
Post #112
QUOTE (HP Plod @ Jun 6 2014, 05:59 PM) There are cameras that are being trialled that are able to detect seatbelt, mobile phone and other distracting offences... If they are hidden will they too be damned to hell? No, irrelevant to the discussion. False analogy as there is no alternative to that apparatus that would provide greater efficacy, unlike with hidden cameras. |
|---|
 |
UNR8D_
Post #113
Understand what your saying HP but the theory is flawed, if the speed is such an issue would it not be a priority for protection of the community to stop the offending vehicle and deal with the matter by the roadside hence not only deterring further offenses but also rectifying (by your own theory and supported by the same lines tramped out year after year) unsafe practice that kills? or is it better for revenue that you allow that "unsafe" practice to continue but keep your under cover profile and boost the coffers some more. I don't see how you could have it both ways? |
|---|
|
|
wolfman101
Post #115
Which brings me to the second road safety campaign aspect that really bothers me. I am all for safety campaigns, but I dislike the deceptive nature of the Australian approach. The death toll has been dropping consistently for decades, yet the campaigns are designed to give the impression that at any given time we are in the middle of a road fatality epidemic. |
|---|
 |
Shuffs
Post #116
Funny you should say that Wolfie...this mornings news QUOTE New figures show the number of road deaths in Australia has dropped by almost a quarter during the past decade. The Road Deaths Australia Summary reports on road fatalities from 2004 until 2013. The results show a 25 per cent drop in all types of road deaths. When population changes are taken into account the drop increases to 35 per cent. Drivers aged between 17 and 25 saw the greatest improvement, with the number of deaths halving between 2004 and 2013. The biggest reductions were in New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and the ACT. The number of fatalities involving drivers aged 65 and over increased, partly because of a rise in the number of people in that age group. Older drivers comprise 14 per cent of the population but accounted for 23 per cent of fatalities over the last decade. Single vehicle accidents were the most common, representing 47 per cent of all crashes, and men accounted for almost three-quarters of all deaths. Motorcycle accidents are more likely to result in fatalities than car accidents, with motorbike riders representing almost 20 per cent of all road deaths. The report was published by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics. Licensing changes saving the lives of young drivers: experts Road safety authorities say changes to licensing systems are a factor in fewer young people dying on Australian roads. VicRoads director of vehicle and road use policy James Holgate says logbooks for young drivers have made a significant difference. "In our view, one of the main contributions has been the introduction of graduated licensing systems," he said. "In Victoria we introduced our scheme in 2008 and we did an evaluation of it a couple of years ago and we found that 23 per cent fewer 18 to 20 year olds were being involved in a crash in their first year." Graduated licensing requires young people to log a specified number of hours on the road with a parent or instructor before they can drive on their own. Mr Holgate says that is more effective than shock-and-awe road trauma courses where students are presented with graphic simulated accidents. "I think that people come out of the course feeling all good about themselves and understanding what the risks are and say they're going to be a better driver, but once they get behind the wheel we find that it doesn't actually make a lot of difference," he said. "In terms of preparing young drivers to drive, the research is showing that that 120 hours and that on road experience is really the best thing that works." Testing for alcohol, drugs and enforcing speed limits is also helping: professor Professor Max Cameron from Monash University's Accident Research Centre in Melbourne says greater enforcement of road rules has also made a big difference. "We've had a lot of success in the drink-driving area of course and in more recent years drug-driving, random drug-testing has become a common process in all Australian states," he said. "It's an expensive way of testing for the presence of drugs on the road, but some analysis I've done shows that the benefits far exceed the cost. "But I think the big issue, we've had a lot of success in most states, has been in the speed enforcement area. "The Australian states have finally stopped apologising for enforcing speed limits and are all doing it very effectively. Some better than others, but we've been able to reduce speeding and hence speeding crashes to a large extent." Professor Cameron also has an explanation for the rising number of deaths of older drivers. "The big issue in fact is their injury susceptibility," he said. "When you look at the other levels of injury like hospitalisation, they don't figure to the same extent. "It's just true that an elderly person in a road crash is very much more likely to die. " Professor Cameron says there has been a huge shift in Australia's attitude to safe driving during the almost 50 years he has been involved in road safety. "We've seen enormous progress and I think there's more progress to come," he said. "It's become now a bit of an economic argument; how much is government prepared to invest to prevent road trauma?" https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/australia...-093941795.html |
|---|
 |
McLeod
Post #117
Reduced young deaths would have to be directly related to the P plate laws, which makes plenty of sense really. |
|---|
|
|
xr6greg
Post #118
Qld road toll actually increasing. |
|---|
|
|
wolfman101
Post #119
Car fatalities are on a consistent decline I believe, and have been since the 70s. |
|---|
|
|
xr6greg
Post #121
QUOTE (wolfman101 @ Jun 7 2014, 01:37 PM) Car fatalities are on a consistent decline I believe, and have been since the 70s. Since the 70's? Good grief. A lot of things have happened since then wolfman101. Women can vote, they are allowed out of the kitchen and we even gave them permission to get driver's licences... |
|---|
 |
clutch-monkey
Post #122
QUOTE (wolfman101 @ Jun 6 2014, 04:19 PM) I still question the motivation between choosing to hide a camera, have the hoon pass through, not realise they have been pinged and kill granny down the road in the high risk area vs having it signed, and forcing the hoon to slow down through the high risk area. Seems counter intuitive to me. I'm not complaining about the act-speeding is speeding. If you can be pinged you SHOULD be. It's how it's represented to the public that bothers me. I believe that if road safety was the highest priority that almost all cameras would be fixed. this because it's an easy thing to target (and hey, money) the governments half assed campaign has now seen a nation of drivers who believe so long as they aren't drinking or speeding they are the bestest safest drivers evar it's f'king hopeless QUOTE (xr6greg @ Jun 6 2014, 04:59 PM) Yep. Well said wolfman101. HP Plod. I'm with you and your duties. No issue on pinging anybody who can't do the right thing ... How come we NEVER see speed camera's at work sites? How come, if school Xing's are such a concern (and we both know there are no genuine concerns at schools), we NEVER see speed camera's there? How come they are always set up on high traffic volume roads where the offence of follow too close (layman's terms) is the BIGGEST contributing factor to injury accidents? there are speed cameras at school crossings all the time.. |
|---|
|
|
HP Plod
Post #123
I can't see how using cameras for seatbelts etc is irrelevant to the discussion. You all bitch and whine about the underhand sneakiness of speed cameras...why? |
|---|
|
|
xr6greg
Post #124
You've kind of missed the whole point of the issue HP Plod. You, as a traffic officer, do not attend traffic crashes because the general duties guys do therefore your perspective is biased about the effectiveness of sneaky covert speed cameras on traffic crashes. |
|---|
|
|
clutch-monkey
Post #125
greg from a discussion on another forum speed was the major factor in something like 14% of all road fatalities. not sure if that's the exact figure from memory, but the point discussed was the disgusting focus on speed kills huurrr versus the actual low proportion of fatalities it is responsible for. |
|---|
|
|
xr6greg
Post #126
It's referred to as a 'contributing factor'. So you are on your mobile phone, steering with your knees whilst you lean over and pick up your sunnies and creep up over the speed limit at the same time. Hit the skids when you look up before you plow into the tree and go to the great skidpan in the sky. FCU (Forensic Crash Unit) determines that speed was involved so therefore speed kills... |
|---|
|
|
HP Plod
Post #127
QUOTE (xr6greg @ Jun 7 2014, 06:07 PM) You've kind of missed the whole point of the issue HP Plod. You, as a traffic officer, do not attend traffic crashes because the general duties guys do therefore your perspective is biased about the effectiveness of sneaky covert speed cameras on traffic crashes. Unsafe manoeuvres, follow too close and distraction are the big factors causing traffic crashes. Morons on mobile phones, combing their hair, arguing with passengers, changing lanes without checking etc. Drugs and alcohol are sometimes found in the blood. Speed isn't really up there. High speed fatals are usually out in the country areas ... when did you last deploy your revenue raising covert camera outside the metro area? The QPS has a killsheet system for RBTs upon which they receive dollars from QT. You, as a road policing command officer, are also on a performance assessment (kill sheet) with a monthly expectation of figures. Get off your high horse and understand that sneaky revenue raising covert speed cameras have minimal effect on driver behaviour and traffic crashes. How very incorrect you are. No kill sheet No RBT quota... We've gone from 220 RBT a month to targeted breath tests. I attend crashes, not as regular as generals but I still do my fair share. I have my own high expectations, I write as much as I can but I try to write LEO's as this so the whole idea of road policing. I'm sure that your employment has aspects where you are passionate about their existence and strive to achieve the outcomes associated with them, so if we tried to undermine it, would you bow down and accept defeat. It's not a high horse it's reality, and it's something I'm passionate about, I've seen enough dead bodies in cars to know that whatever tools are at our disposal to ensure the safe travel on a road then I'll use them with zero apologies and sympathy. |
|---|
|
|
HP Plod
Post #128
QUOTE (xr6greg @ Jun 7 2014, 06:31 PM) It's referred to as a 'contributing factor'. So you are on your mobile phone, steering with your knees whilst you lean over and pick up your sunnies and creep up over the speed limit at the same time. Hit the skids when you look up before you plow into the tree and go to the great skidpan in the sky. FCU (Forensic Crash Unit) determines that speed was involved so therefore speed kills... It's the easiest to determine, so if it's a causal factor then why not make it a statistic |
|---|
|
|
wolfman101
Post #129
QUOTE (HP Plod @ Jun 7 2014, 05:12 PM) I can't see how using cameras for seatbelts etc is irrelevant to the discussion. You all bitch and whine about the underhand sneakiness of speed cameras...why? And yet when I raise the question of using cameras for different offences, it's poo poo-ed and told it's not relevant to the discussion. But using these cameras in a covert function, sending you a ticket in the mail for failing to wear a seatbelt is exactly the same as a speed camera. Why is it that we as a nation of drivers think it's socially acceptable to speed but fail to wear a seatbelt or drink drive is abolished and seen as completely unacceptable? And it's interesting to sort of prove my point of view regarding road safety with the article posted by shuffs, they have atributed drops in serious crashes to factors undertaken by police other than speed cameras, or speed detection. It's a small facet in the whole safety campaign, yet it seems that you all think it's the only thing we do as it's the most widely criticised activity. As for marked versus unmarked, it's what society has bred into the minds of people these days... Hold your hand and guide you, show you how to do things, make things so obvious to you that you don't have to think for yourself. You see a marked car you change your behaviour purely in that instant, in the area. If they banned all unmarked patrols and made everything high visibility, then you have a green light to do what you want when you want as you as you don't see the marked patrol. Talk on your phone, see a marked car, drop it, wait for it to go by and then continue the offence. Throw unmarked patrols in the mix, you are going to think twice about doing the wrong thing as you have no idea when we may pop up and bark at you. If tomorrow the papers said, that all police patrols were going to be covert, plain clothes, varying vehicles, would you be so complacent in your driving behaviour or would you change how you drive to prevent enforcement action be taken against you. If tomorrow the papers said that sper was being abolished and if you failed to pay a fine you'd be sent to jail, would you be inclined to say "fcuk it, I'll cop the fine and pay it back $1per week" or would you watch what you do so you can avoid the fine and the possibility of hanging no money to pay it and being sent to jail ( unless your wolfman as he can afford anything I throw at him, he'll just sell a merc) I'm sick of the lack of responsibility that society takes for their actions these days, constantly I am blamed for losing a persons licence, it's my fault that they are going lose their job...pffft. Excuse my French but "if your dick touches your ass then go fcuk yourself". OK, you are missing the entire point of the analogy. Unmarked, new tech that detects infringements such as texting, seatbelts, etc. Has my full support, as it is probably the BEST way to curb texting, seatbelts etc. My contention is that unmarked cameras for SPEED offences are NOT the most effective option curb SPEED offences. They are just the most lucrative. An BETTER option exists, but is underutilised to favour the method that generates the most tickets, rather than slowing people down. Did that clear it up? This is why the two situations are not analogous, and why one bothers me ethically but not the other. |
|---|
|
|
xr6greg
Post #130
HP Plod. |
|---|
 |
the big finger
Post #131
QUOTE (wolfman101 @ Jun 7 2014, 07:32 PM) OK, you are missing the entire point of the analogy. Unmarked, new tech that detects infringements such as texting, seatbelts, etc. Has my full support, as it is probably the BEST way to curb texting, seatbelts etc. My contention is that unmarked cameras for SPEED offences are NOT the most effective option curb SPEED offences. They are just the most lucrative. An BETTER option exists, but is underutilised to favour the method that generates the most tickets, rather than slowing people down. Did that clear it up? This is why the two situations are not analogous, and why one bothers me ethically but not the other. And if coppers drove around looking fof speeders, no seat belts or mobile phones etc who'd be out getting the real crimes I don't like unmarked cameras either but at least its one bloke catching lots rather then ten coppers catching none police resources should be used for crimes ,paedophiles,armed robbers rogue bikes etc Want curb speeding honestly use GPS to limit speed and make cars like all my trucks 110klm/hr period as this is the maximum speed our roads are. I've seen more crashes on the highway the most coppers and ambos put together and what I see is a a lot of speeding, and I mean alot. Whether its speeding to go round a car or truck . Ive seen em all. I do over 6000 kays every week(bris to Mackay return 3 times) and I'm not shocked any more at not only the speeds people do but how they do it. |
|---|
|
|
Shuffs
Post #132
QUOTE (HP Plod @ Jun 7 2014, 05:12 PM) [b]And it's interesting to sort of prove my point of view regarding road safety with the article posted by shuffs, they have atributed drops in serious crashes to factors undertaken by police other than speed cameras, or speed detection.[/b] It's a small facet in the whole safety campaign, yet it seems that you all think it's the only thing we do as it's the most widely criticised activity. If tomorrow the papers said that sper was being abolished and if you failed to pay a fine you'd be sent to jail, would you be inclined to say "fcuk it, I'll cop the fine and pay it back $1per week" or would you watch what you do so you can avoid the fine and the possibility of hanging no money to pay it and being sent to jail ( unless your wolfman as he can afford anything I throw at him, he'll just sell a merc) It was one of the main reasons I posted it Plod,I felt you needed a wing man,with all these fukkers,and messyshits coming at you from out of the sun In NSW,if you don't pay your fines,you become a 'Fine Defaulter',and this is how they deal with it QUOTE Drive While Suspended (due to fine default) Under recent changes to the law, The State Debt Recovery Office (SDRO) now has the power to suspend or cancel your licence as a result of you not paying your fines. Under certain circumstances, your vehicle’s registration may also be cancelled, and you may be charged with using an unregistered motor vehicle, using an uninsured motor vehicle and drive vehicle on road area with tax unpaid. The SDRO may notify you of the enforcement action taken. Failure by the SDRO to notify you does not affect the enforcement action. It is important that you are aware of any licence suspension or cancelled vehicle registration. If you are unaware of the enforcement action taken, you risk committing the offence while suspended or cancelled, driving unregistered, and driving uninsured. If you have been charged with driving with your licence suspended as a result of a fine default, you may be facing a driver’s licence disqualification period of 3 months. QUOTE (xr6greg @ Jun 7 2014, 06:07 PM) You've kind of missed the whole point of the issue HP Plod. You, as a traffic officer, do not attend traffic crashes because the general duties guys do therefore your perspective is biased about the effectiveness of sneaky covert speed cameras on traffic crashes. Queensland obviously works to a different set of guidelines to New South Wales,as probably 75% of the time a highway vehicle is the first on scene (and that percentage would increase on long weekends,such as we are having now),even if a GD vehicle is the first response vehicle,and there are problems with traffic flow,the highway guys are always called in to assist. |
|---|
|
|
HP Plod
Post #133
QUOTE (xr6greg @ Jun 7 2014, 07:47 PM) HP Plod. Targetted RBT? No kill sheet? So the Road Policing Command is excluded from the QPS OPR system? Interesting! Most metro suburban stations are still required to perform, generally, 13,000 to 20,000 RBTs per annum but the traffic branch is excluded from that requirement? Your credibility is getting weaker with every post. Oooooohhhhh I see so you are sitting within my section and know exactly how I operate with my team??? Interesting. As stated we used to have a 220 per officer RBT "quota". It was expected and it was questioned when not met or exceeded. Then we determined that just the mere jamming a tube in your mouth for the sake of making the numbers was counter productive to the reason we were doing it in the first place. Now we perform certain hours of night shift where we are to target drink drivers, it is not questioned if we only do 10 rbt's but get a couple of drink drivers, we were targeting specific vehicles throughout our shift. RBT no longer stands for random, it is roadside, and people say to me you only pulled me up because I came from the pub, as I say to them you don't fish in a dry pond. Yes we still conduct static RBT sites, where our numbers of RBT will increase with mass testing, but we are never questioned by the commissioned officers within our command as to why we are lacking in RBT numbers...PROVIDED.... We are bringing in the offenders. General duties are still required to pump the numbers out, we are not with them, we have no affiliation with them anymore since going to a road policing command, we are a separate entity so what they do and what we do are not compared. So you have absolutely no idea of how we operate within my section Greg, so don't attack me by saying I'm lying and that I have no credibility, you sir have only a minimal amount of knowledge as to my duties and responsibilities. I can't talk for other road policing sections as to how they operate I can only go off how my section runs and so far we are topping the state for infringements relating to the fatal five, drink drivers, arrests both traffic and criminal... (I top the arrest rate for drug relegated pinches from vehicles within my region), so we are praised by command and by our number s we are only doing half the RBT of that of other sections and stations. |
|---|
|
|
HP Plod
Post #134
QUOTE (wolfman101 @ Jun 7 2014, 07:32 PM) OK, you are missing the entire point of the analogy. Unmarked, new tech that detects infringements such as texting, seatbelts, etc. Has my full support, as it is probably the BEST way to curb texting, seatbelts etc. My contention is that unmarked cameras for SPEED offences are NOT the most effective option curb SPEED offences. They are just the most lucrative. An BETTER option exists, but is underutilised to favour the method that generates the most tickets, rather than slowing people down. Did that clear it up? This is why the two situations are not analogous, and why one bothers me ethically but not the other. I disagree, why is it then that when I operate a speed camera device, I don't detect more vehicles? Why is it based on my average facts that I put up in a reply that I'm not detecting 75%+ of vehicle travelling through my detection site both covert and overt? By your reckoning cameras don't work which means more people speed, so by that we should be catching more offenders. As I said I issue more infringements for seatbelts and phones than I do speeding, so people must be more conscious of their speeds and less conscious if their behaviour within the cabin. If people were aware that cameras were now taken away and there was no measures for targeting speeding at all, then watch the carnage unfold, I find it amusing that I am able to justify the reasoning behind enforcement techniques, and able to explain their rationale yet you my fellow friends are only able to say they are a blatant revenue raising tool. We are trying to make you travel at the posted speed limits, and you justify this by saying bullshit, you are just trying to raise money.... Yet it comes back to this, don't speed don't raise revenue. Oh but sometimes you just creep over the speed limit.... Well you are a danger to the roads as your lack of concentration has just increased your risk rate of a crash. I don't speed. I'm aware at all times of my speed, I'm aware at all times of my speed limit.. And if there is some doubt as to what zone I'm in, I revert to default speed limit until I can verify. |
|---|
|
|
HP Plod
Post #135
QUOTE (Shuffs @ Jun 8 2014, 07:02 AM) It was one of the main reasons I posted it Plod,I felt you needed a wing man,with all these fukkers,and messyshits coming at you from out of the sun In NSW,if you don't pay your fines,you become a 'Fine Defaulter',and this is how they deal with it Queensland obviously works to a different set of guidelines to New South Wales,as probably 75% of the time a highway vehicle is the first on scene (and that percentage would increase on long weekends,such as we are having now),even if a GD vehicle is the first response vehicle,and there are problems with traffic flow,the highway guys are always called in to assist. Thank you. We too have sper suspensions here but it is a massively flawed system because it's based on the fact that we have to intercept you driving and then you are charged with unlicensed driving. Think about how often you are stopped by police, then think about whether you pay your fines or not. I hate sper, always have. When I started in this job, warrants of commitment were the boss, don't pay a fine, go to jail. It worked, we used to do warrant shifts, and you'd be surprised how May fine defaulters found money outstanding at the prospect of going to jail. I reckon you can accumulate up to $1000 in fines and be able to pay them off at sper, if you go over this then the money is reverted to warrants. I'm astounded at how much people have accumulated when I bring them before the courts, which in turn just fine them and put it on sper (DERP!!!) Goods and chattels, vehicles, anything worth something belonging to you should be confiscated to attempt to haul in the massive debt. This current system doesn't work, it only relies on the good people accepting responsibility of their actions and paying their fines. |
|---|
|
|
wolfman101
Post #137
QUOTE (HP Plod @ Jun 8 2014, 07:41 AM) I disagree, why is it then that when I operate a speed camera device, I don't detect more vehicles? Why is it based on my average facts that I put up in a reply that I'm not detecting 75%+ of vehicle travelling through my detection site both covert and overt? By your reckoning cameras don't work which means more people speed, so by that we should be catching more offenders. As I said I issue more infringements for seatbelts and phones than I do speeding, so people must be more conscious of their speeds and less conscious if their behaviour within the cabin. If people were aware that cameras were now taken away and there was no measures for targeting speeding at all, then watch the carnage unfold, I find it amusing that I am able to justify the reasoning behind enforcement techniques, and able to explain their rationale yet you my fellow friends are only able to say they are a blatant revenue raising tool. We are trying to make you travel at the posted speed limits, and you justify this by saying bullshit, you are just trying to raise money.... Yet it comes back to this, don't speed don't raise revenue. Oh but sometimes you just creep over the speed limit.... Well you are a danger to the roads as your lack of concentration has just increased your risk rate of a crash. I don't speed. I'm aware at all times of my speed, I'm aware at all times of my speed limit.. And if there is some doubt as to what zone I'm in, I revert to default speed limit until I can verify. Jesus man. It's not that hard. I have only ever had ONE SINGLE CONTENTION. ONE. Not "cameras are solely for revenue raising". Not "cameras don't work". Not ANY of the other straw men you try to pin on me. My contention: Fixed, signed cameras are a more effective deterrent than hidden ones. ADDRESS THIS ASSERTION AND NOTHING ELSE PLEASE. |
|---|
 |
vk134
Post #138
The fixed cameras and very obvious cameras seem to slow the traffic down very effectively, I notice most jellyfish seem to go into drone mode and slow down to 90 in the 100 speed camera area. |
|---|
|
|
clutch-monkey
Post #139
QUOTE (HP Plod @ Jun 8 2014, 07:41 AM) If people were aware that cameras were now taken away and there was no measures for targeting speeding at all, then watch the carnage unfold, what a load of shit. disproved so many times elsewhere the repeated lowering of speed tolerances (finer than what speedo's are calibrated to) is just more grasping at straws by the government. blatant money grab with 14% of fatalities ascribed to speed as a major contributing factor, it all looks a bit ridiculous.. |
|---|
|
|
wolfman101
Post #140
QUOTE (vk134 @ Jun 8 2014, 11:04 AM) The fixed cameras and very obvious cameras seem to slow the traffic down very effectively, I notice most jellyfish seem to go into drone mode and slow down to 90 in the 100 speed camera area. Of the times I have been caught speeding, I was aware of it, I knew I was taking a risk and copped the fine accordingly. I guess the drivers that shit me are the constant speed types who never monitor their speed, they are happy to just drive at about 90kmh where ever the fk they are 100 zone or 80 and are happy to sit in the right lane, totally oblivious to the traffic behind them and they squeal the loudest when they get done for speeding through just lack of attention. Straw men......mmmm, what have you been reading It's a common debate term? Plod keeps setting up false positions that no one actually takes, then attacks those rather than address the actual points. This is the very definition of a straw man argument. |
|---|
-
Member Login
If you have a BoostCruising account enter your user name and password into the yellow box.
Alternatively, you can quickly login with Facebook.
If you don't have an account create one below.
Create Account -
Login using your Facebook account!