Mike Harding posted:

So... it would seem we need to change the system rather than hope human behaviour will, magically, change?

Why do we even _need_ people with "Stop" signs!? Portable traffic lights have been around for a very long time?

Mike Harding

mike w (WA) posted:

only $12-$18 an hour??

there are guys in the west, especially the ones working on the freeway, earning $90,000pa for the same thing!!!

Alloy c/t posted:

Mike w [wa] top rate in Qld is $18.56 per hr casual if working for the largest traffic controll company in Australia [ is actually listed on the stock exhchange],, Mike H , portable traffic signals ? yep been around for ever , very big $$$$ ,not as portable as one thinks ,and still takes manpower to set up and remove and control.

Member - Bradley posted:

sheez, come to melb where the mauris have the racket tied up, do a 2 day traffic management ticket - $ 29 an hour is the usual going rate..

Alloy c/t posted:

Bradley ,in Qld a "ticket" is no longer , is an actual "Traffic Control " licence tied into your normal vehicle licence ,standard t/c licence has to be updated every 3 yrs at a cost of $125 / $200 depending on the training company + $76 licence fee to the government , big fines in place for wrong placement of signs ect ect ,

Mike Harding posted:

Speed cameras are nothing more than a con. to raise money.

mfewster posted:

Now how do you figure that out? Are speed limits just a con to raise money- or do you think there should be no speed limits? And if we have speed limits, what is the point unless they are enforced?
I think the experiences being discussed in the thread show why we need speed limits and why drivers (many drivers at any rate, not those one's like you and I) tend to need reminders to keep their minds on the job.

Sand Man (SA) posted:

Yea but! no but! yea but!

How many times have speed cameras been placed on declining sections of roads, where every modern car would creep up in speed, unless one "rides the brakes".
Then you get pinged for speeding because you are 5 kms over the limit.

Or included at traffic lights where the strobe light may cause severe distraction to other law abiding motorists travelling through the intersection at the same time.

Mike has a valid point.

Speed cameras rarely deter "speeding", at least not until one receives the "bluey" in the mail some weeks later. Therefore, they tend to be less of a deterrent and more of a punishment process.

Well, that's my thoughts anyway.

mfewster posted:

When I got a ticket, it acted as a deterrent. But if you want to see it as a fund raiser, think of it this way. Governments have to raise revenue somehow. Bit like poker machines. How much you want to contribute to the costs of government is in your own hands. I would rather they do it on speeding than raise my fixed taxes.

Mike Harding posted:

That's fine: as long as you understand it's about money and not about road safety.

mfewster posted:

No, I didn't say that. I said "If you want to see it as a fundraiser.." Personally, fines act as a deterrent to me. It's in your hands if you want to contribute to the tax base. You still need to say whether or not there should be speed limits, and if so, how they should be enforced.

Truckster (Vic) posted:

Anyone who believes speedcameras are anything more than tax collectors should remove themselves from the gene pool.

mfewster posted:

I rather thought the rest of the thread was about drivers whose inability to observe their surroundings and the resulting threat to the gene pool was what this was about. You might like to answer my previous questions re the need for speed limits. Or do you think some sort of gentleman's word system is all that's required?

Truckster (Vic) posted:

This said it all
"Governments have to raise revenue somehow."
and
"That's fine: as long as you understand it's about money and not about road safety."

You obviously dont live in Victoria.. where for some reason the state tax collecting gov thinks they are more superior to the Fed Gov and all professional National Roads Authorities (RACV, NRMA etc) in working out limits
- Fed gives 10% speedo error..
- Vic gives something like 3% which is sometimes less than a speedo needle width and your instant criminal... and for got sake dont sneeze or scratch ya nuts, as you may kill people by speeding 3kph over...

But you keep believing its all about safety. really really it is. you will feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

mfewster posted:

Now I am confused. Are we discussing the principle of speed cameras or the tolerance margin? The original point of the thread was statements by speed lollypop men indicating the number of drivers who were too busy scratching their nuts or something to have much awareness of what was going on around them.

Member - Axle posted:

You & Truckster are both correct!!, But different issues.

Start a new post for( What ever sake)

Cheers.

Junior posted:

If the state government was serious about speed cameras being used to reduce the number of speeding drivers and the road toll, they would require that all speed cameras (especially mobile ones) have warning a-frame signs like "speed camera ahead" put up before the speed trap- this slows people down, then if people continue to speed they pay the price.
When they put HIDDEN cameras in "black spots", the government is simply admitting that revenue is more important than lives.

Mike Harding posted:

The, continuing, very high revenue intake from speed cameras would seem to indicate that they don't work (except to generate income), would it not?

Mike Harding

Junior posted:

They work just FINE! Mike!!!

mfewster posted:

Junior and Mike. Junior first.Drivers just don't all behave in the same way and you can't expect them all to respond to common sense or warnings. So some crossings have permanent cameras (and warnings that they are there) and others are hidden and moved because some drivers will speed etc if they think there is no one around. What is the alternative? So that drivers know the cameras are always there, cover all our roads with camera coverage all the time? Sort of like the surveillance we are getting on railway stations and other public places? It would probably work, but I'd rather not suggest it in case "they" take it up.

Mike. The continuing high revenue only indicates that some drivers are either slow learners; aren't paying attention to their driving or simply don't mind easing the tax burden on the rest of the community. It doesn't mean all drivers, or even most, drivers don't think about the cameras and adjust their driving. I would like to see an analysis of the figures. I suspect that some drivers never learn and get pinged all the time, others cop a few and start to think about it. If the system really didn't have a safety aim it wouldn't be combined with the demerit point system. They would want to keep you(not you personally) on the road so they could screw more and more out of you instead of sending their best contributors off the field to the sin bin.

Truckster (Vic) posted:

>. Are we discussing the principle of speed cameras or the tolerance margin

Both.

1) The margins work in with making money. Narrower the margin, the more money they make. As said, the speedo error can bleep you up. Not their problem.. and you wouldnt even know if you just bought the car.. I can tell u even after you prove that there is error, and have had the car a few weeks, its your problem.. nobody on earth would know having only just got a new car.

2) if they were serious about "SPEED KILLS" on our dangeous roads, they would spend money on roads do people can drive at safe speeds.
They dont, so its cheaper to just fine people to slow them down.

anyway, you just keep believing its all for safety...

mfewster posted:

I suppose Truckster that you have nailed what this discussion is really about underneath. It comes down to those words "they would" and "you keep". The public want governments (any governments, Lib/Lab whatever) to be responsible for everything but don't want to do it themselves. Try saying it this way. If WE were more serious about road safety, WE would be happy to pay the extra taxes to cover the country with whatever road design we think gives the safest roads. and WE would demand and vote for politicians who would deliver this. Expensive proposition that, in this country where a small population base has to finance one of the longest road networks with some of the most difficult road foundation problems on the Planet. I don't think it is me just keeping believing, I think it is more a public that wants to make someone else responsible for their actions and take as little responsibility themselves as they can.
Again, look at what started this thread. Forum members (who were working on repairing roads) telling their experiences with drivers who didn't have their heads about them while driving. We still haven't had anyone take up the challenge to argue for no speed limits. So what would you prefer? Get rid of the fines so there is no issue of it being just a $ raiserand move straight to licence cancellation?

Truckster (Vic) posted:

>>WE would be happy to pay the extra taxes to cover the country with whatever road design we think gives the safest roads. and WE would demand and vote for politicians who would deliver this.

Lets change WE to YOU... cause i aint happy to pay an extra bleep in cent. I pay well and truly more than my share of tax thanks. Maybe if they LEARNED to spend it in a controlled manner WE would be better off.

Nothing you ever say will convince me that SPEED CAMERAS (not safety cameras), are anything more than a tax station. Which the Gov has admitted in the past (although by accident) that they couldnt afford to continue without them.

If they were only ever in blackspots, or dangerous places, you may have .000000000000000000000000000000001% chance, but they aint they are placed where they can make the most money, never in black spots..

mfewster posted:

Truckster, it was you in post 16 who said "they" should spend more on roads so we can all drive at safe speeds - but you wouldn't be happy to pay more taxes so this could happen (and neither would I). We could talk about why governments put up those expensive (and free) things for us to check the error on our speedos and why dangerous spots get the warning signs put up. Etc. But as you say, nothing is going to convince you, so let's call the discussion closed.

Truckster (Vic) posted:

What you dont think they have enough 100millions in surplus to spend a few million on the people who they rob of this money in the first place? ROTFLMAO...

Alloy c/t posted:

Dayglow vests ,flashing lights , big red "witches hats" ,warning sign after warning sign , ,,,, need to stand out more , perhaps if the driving public actually drove as per the road rules and law instead of being cocooned in their airconed music filled vehicle talking on the phone people would "see" .

Member - JohnR (Vic)&Moses posted:

F'loosie, there are too many signs in lots of places along the highway. Not only thta but with the school signs, we have confusion.

In Victoria I have seen 40kph and 60kph school signs. You have to have your clock set correctly or cop a fine. That is assuming you know the school isn't on holidays or it is at the appropriate or inappropriate time. I know that Nick copped a fine until he got a letter from a school principal to say the school was out on holidays - the cop said they weren't. That was in NSW too.

We so frequently have "Road Work" signs and no sign of any roadworks. It makes you wonder what we as drivers are being trained for when they allow that to happen. Just like the speed trap I fell into with signs too close together West of Mildura last year. At a truck check stop they were there with a radar gun pulling up every car, no exceptions just to make a point - not that I understand what the point was.........

mike w (WA) posted:

but if they were keeping an eye on the speedo, would they not need to be keeping an eye out for cameras on poles, behind bus stops, coppers with radar etc??

But I get your point, I frequent the road from West Sawn rd to Bullsbrook quite regularly (im sure you know it well too) and the amount of people who should fit a hiclone to their brain is immense. Often, I drive an ambulance along that same stretch of road, and it is frightening to see some of the behaviour of motorists, with or with out our use of lights and sirens. The road works ionly complicates things more.

FZJ 80 posted:

Doug,

Your correct, driving is becoming a chore. I see myself as very responsible, however hidden cameras are a scare, some speed limits are intensely slow. Have you driven in NSW, you would think your in a communist country. Drive from Brunswick heads to Port MacQuarie and see how many speed cameras (Flash for cash) there are. Like Mike Harding says, it's about the money. Road safety is a convienient excuse!

Regards
Greg

Member - Doug T (W.A) posted:

FZJ 80
Use to drive Trucks Bris / Syd until 2001 . That Camera at Little Italy must get a few

Doug

V8Diesel posted:

Amen to that brother. They're my mates up ahead.

Member - Doug T (W.A) posted:

Richard
You would know what I mean here, you probably have the same happen, I slow down to the posted limit and they are sitting right on the bumper or if it's divided they will overtake you.

Doug

Member - Axle posted:

Richard, I'll go along with that one!.

Member - Davoe (Nullagine) posted:

my first fine was speeding through roadeorks and no belt, havnt done either since

Steve_D40 posted:

Richard, my history is in roadworks and surveying and I tend to agree with you.
What does peeve me though are the lazy and inconsiderate construction crews that leave 40k signs out all night when their are NO workers on the road and no safety reason for them. This only encourages people to use the "boy cried wolf" excuse.

Richard Kovac posted:

I once worked doing expansion joints on the Hume Freeway between Wallain and Broadford, In those days the only thing between me and the traffic was a CRB man, not even a red vest, I was not allowed to enter the middle of the road with out him standing down stream of me.. (he had to be hit before a contractor) and I'm not kidding..

This was all done while the road was live 120 km in those days 80 mph, by the end they had signage and flagies and traffic slowed down,

as a fitter I worked for many years on earthmoving machines and have done my time in red vest and a lolly pop

Richard

D yes

Richard Kovac posted:

Steve_D40

Yes I agree with that also, sign management needs to improve as well..

Angler posted:

Don't you just hate it when you slow down after seeing a 40kph road work sign and never see any road work being done. Particularly over the weekends.

Pooley

Member - Beatit (QLD) posted:

Yeah I do! Even more so when they also then want to enforce the reduced speed limit. Reckon some places they should pull down the signs when they finish work but I guess that costs money - a lot easier to leave it and get some poor old sod in strife.

Kind regards

Member - Axle posted:

Your right Bilbo, Learn't that in one hr, Will show more caution myself to roadside workers from now on.

Axle.

Junior posted:

I love the clowns that won't do over 90 in a 110km/hr zone, but are happy to speed through country town zones of 50 or 60 at 90! Just don't get it!

Member - Andrew (QLD) posted:

At least they stayed on the road, unlike your rig picture


Andrew

junior posted:

yeah... I know- I really gotta learn how to reverse!

Geoff (Newcastle, NSW) posted:

You know Crackles, that to me isn't a traffic infringement. It's far more serious than that.

The fool has a genetic problem and is really trying to take you and the other innocent parties with him on his endeavour to chlorinate the gene pool. Involving you and I in his quest to kill himself is just not on.

Is it only me that's noticed some kids fail finger painting but every kid gets a licence? I can only guess that the training and evaluation for finger painting is far more stringent than those required for a drivers licence!!

Geoff