Hidden SA speed cameras

Submitted: Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:02
ThreadID: 75920 Views:5971 Replies:23 FollowUps:48
This Thread has been Archived
A quiet Sat morn 23rd Jan at 9.30am. I left the Coobowie Caravan Park for a trip to Stansbury for the markets. After deciding to go via Wool Bay I drove though the deserted village. As I approached the 80km zone I started to accelerate slowly and aprox 20 mtrs from the 80zone I was doing 70kph. Little did I know that my trip to Stansbury would end in tears. For hidding there no more than 10 meters from the 80 zone unbeknowns to me was one of those hiiden revenue raisers. On our return to Stansbury through Wool Bay I actually saw the theif in a white commadore and commented about the need for a speed camera in Wool Bay, population 50. I asked the question, what on earth has this got to do with road safety.
Two weeks went by and in the mail I received my special surprise to remind me of my time in SA. A $300 fine and loss of points. I can assure you that I will NEVER return to SA again in my life. This legalised theft from the stealing police and Govt. is a crime in its self. After 30 years with a clean record and my being a professional coach driver who has driven more than one million k's I find this episode that most outrageous thing that has ever happened to me. South Australia? Good ridance.
Jack
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Willem - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:24

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:24
Well Jack, you will soon run out of States.

Every State in Australia has those hidden cameras. Every time we go Interstate I wait to see if a surprise is coming through the mail especially after driving in Victoria. I am ever so careful.

The trouble is one slows down for a town and then on the way out you naturally accellerate when still in the 50 or 60 zone to build up speed again. We all do it. I think that many accidents are the result of the driver checking the speed more than watching the road.

You'll survive.....lol


Cheers
AnswerID: 403566

Follow Up By: Honky - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 15:45

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 15:45
You will find the Authorities do allow for this when they put in the signes so they are double dipping.

Honky
0
FollowupID: 673140

Follow Up By: Member - Old Girl (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 00:21

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 00:21
Last year I spent 6mths in the passenger seat due to points over a 5year period which included two lots of double points, one was for a trailer plug fell out and the other a rolling stop turning left with a full load on the trailer nearly got charged with that one musnt abuse the police. Anyhow now I am constantly looking at my speedo. I don't answer the phone the kids do. I am for ever having people tail gate me when im doing the limit but to hell with them.
I had my fair share of hidden cameras and paid the price. I would have to say after living in SA 16 years ago they use to hide back then. They are starting that in QLD.
0
FollowupID: 673253

Reply By: dbish - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:33

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:33
Hi Jack I live in SA & been driving for 45 yrs & in Feb I to got done at Ardrossan same setup my fine $220 they are sneaky. They are just as bad in VIC. Daryl
AnswerID: 403569

Reply By: Member - Carl- Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:52

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:52
Hi Jack,

Have a look at the traffic code. I suspect that there might be something saying that, a speed camera cannot be positioned within 100 meters of a change of speed sign. This is the case in some other states.

You can do a FOI request on the "manual of operation of speed cameras" as well. Take a picture of the camera if it is there again.

I know how you feel, I hate them as well.

AnswerID: 403575

Reply By: chisel - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:04

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:04
Someone has done some work for you http://www.policespeedcameras.info/foi.html
Search for "100"

Was it really within 100ms from the sign?
AnswerID: 403576

Reply By: Member No 1- Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:07

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:07
Jack...which planet did you come from?
My understanding is that we only follow (ie speed cameras, number plate readers etc etc) what the other states already have or are about to introduce.


and welcome to the real world....hahahaha
AnswerID: 403577

Reply By: Tim - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:26

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:26
I'm just trying to work out the problem? How dare some one give you a ticket when you were speeding????? The sign was just in front of you, I pressume that means that you were yet to enter the 80 zone?
It's not rocket science, a number with a red ring around it means that is the speed LIMIT. What ever number it says is the maximum speed you can do.Its not revenue raising, its a penalty for breaking the law.
Tim
AnswerID: 403579

Follow Up By: uneekwahn - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:32

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:32
Tim, couldn't agree with you more.

As the saying goes, "Choose your speed, choose your consequences".

Just another keyboard warrior having a whinge on the internet about something that was their own fault because they were breaking the law.

What a waste of a thread.
0
FollowupID: 673082

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:46

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:46
I think thats the issue guys - as presented he has not broken the law.

The camera operator has and so should be fined.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673084

Follow Up By: Sir Kev & Darkie - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:55

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:55
Robin,

Looking at what was written in the OP
"As I approached the 80km zone I started to accelerate slowly and aprox 20 mtrs from the 80zone I was doing 70kph."

To me seems he was still in the 60 zone and yet to enter the 80 zone which therefore is above the legal max speed for that section of road.


Cheers Kev
Russell Coight:
He was presented with a difficult decision: push on into the stretching deserts, or return home to his wife.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673086

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:59

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:59
Hi Kev

Yeah its the 100 meters grey zone before/after signs thats the issue.

Unless under special circumstances they are not allowed to set up there in the knowledge that people may accelerate from 60 up to 80 so that by the time they get to 80 sign they can actually be doing 80.

This is certainly in the guidelines - used to be + - 200 meters in Vic recently until they realised that with 200 to slow down and 200 to speed up you could technically never need to get down to actually 40kph when passing a school zone a couple of hundred meters long.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673106

Follow Up By: Member - mazcan - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:06

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:06
hi
we all do it but!
any driver who increases their speed before they have passed the sign that gives an increase can legally be fined

the above complaintant stated that he was doing 70 in a 60 zone before 20mtr before he passed the 80zone sign
so i would have thought that seeing that he has done a million km's as a coach driver he would be aware of this
or has he always broken the law as an experienced coach driver ????????

i think needs to take it fair and square on the chin and stop complaining
the above law has been around ever since i got my licence about 45yrs ago
so be it cheers
0
FollowupID: 673109

Follow Up By: Tonyfish#58 - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:00

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:00
Come on Fellas - Give the guy a break - It is as he said - Not about safety, its about raising money.

If they were that close to speed zone changes just a plain ripoff. It is obvious the need for reduce speed is no longer valid and they are opening it up in 20k lots.

Absolutely no need to have a speed camera in this location. On the other hand there should always be leeway when speed limits reduce, as the signs are always placed prior to the speed needing to be as stated to give you a fair chance.

Why say this - Well I have put up many a speed sign and chosen the location myself around our towns.

Cheers Tony
0
FollowupID: 673161

Follow Up By: That Troopy Bloke (SA) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:55

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:55
I would suggest that the OP was actually in a 50 zone, not a 60 zone as some of you have assumed. So by his own admission he was 20 kmh over the speed limit.
I haven't been to Wool Bay for a few years, but I'm pretty sure it would be a 50 kmh zone.
The stated fine of $300 would back this up too ( more than 14 kmh over the limit).
If he was in a 60 zone the fine would be closer to $200.

At least there will be one less hoon driver to worry about on the roads in SA :-)

Cheers
Glenn
0
FollowupID: 673174

Reply By: Member - Wim (Qld) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:46

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:46
G'Day Jack

Some days it just feels like the bureaucrat's have their grubby little hands all over you.

Find a nice quite camp spot somewhere and relaxes for a while.

All the best.
Camper setup
July 2012 - Hay River & Binns track
VKS 737 Mobile 0091
Selcall 0091

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 403582

Reply By: Mr Pointyhead - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:52

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:52
I personally wish they had more hidden speed cameras, especially on truck routes like the Newel Highway or Western highway

If there are any visible speed cameras, then the speeding speeding truck drivers (fortunately the minority) just warn then other idiot mates.

I have had a gut-full of speeding idiots behind the wheels of 70 ton B doubles sitting 150mm (6 inches) from the back of my vehicle when I am traveling at the posted speed limit. Anything that the police can do to get these idiots off the road, the safer it will be for all road users.


AnswerID: 403584

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:16

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:16
>> " If there are any visible speed cameras, then the speeding speeding truck drivers (fortunately the minority) just warn then other idiot mates. " > "Anything that the police can do to get these idiots off the road, the safer it will be for all road users. " <<


.... a more visible presence monitoring motorists behaviour .... rather than the hidden monitoring of 5 & 10 kph excesses for revenue .... would probably be a good thing.
0
FollowupID: 673089

Follow Up By: Lex M (Brisbane) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:28

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:28
"monitoring of 5 & 10 kph excesses for revenue"


Ok so 5 or 10 kph excess is OK.
Why not 15 or 20 kph? No let's say 25 or 30 kph. Oh to hell with it, let's say 100 or 110 kph.

If you deliberately drive a vehicle in excess of the posted limit as it appears here then I'd rather you not be on the road at all thanks.

If it's OK to exceed the speed limit then I guess red lights are optional, one way signs are a nuisance to be ignored, stop signs, giveway signs, roundabout rules all optional. So which rules must we follow and which one's are OK to ignore?


0
FollowupID: 673091

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:33

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:33
sighhhhhh ........


.... A MORE VISIBLE PRESENCE MONITORING MOTORISTS BEHAVIOUR ... RATHER THAN THE HIDDEN monitoring of 5 & 10 kph excesses for revenue .... WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD THING.
0
FollowupID: 673092

Follow Up By: Madfisher - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:41

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:41
I was under the impression that all B doubles where speed limited to 100. Although that does not mean they cannot get up to 110 down a hill.
Mark perhaps you could enlighten us
Cheers Pete
0
FollowupID: 673098

Follow Up By: Lex M (Brisbane) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:54

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:54
sighhhhhh ........

.... A MORE VISIBLE PRESENCE MONITORING MOTORISTS BEHAVIOUR ...
AS WELL AS
HIDDEN monitoring of ZERO kph excesses for
COMPLIANCE .... WOULD DEFINATELY BE A GOOD THING.
0
FollowupID: 673103

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:14

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:14
Congratulations Lex

Im pleased you finally managed to say what you want to say ... rather than butchering my post about my preference for pro active policing.

Glad I could help
0
FollowupID: 673117

Follow Up By: Mr Pointyhead - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:23

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:23
I do agree there should be more visible presence as well. In fact, IMHO there should be less emphasis on speed cameras on more on visible enforcement.

As for B doubles speed limited to 100 KM/Hr, that is laughable. I have had B doubles tailgating at 110 Km/Hr going uphill in 110 Km/Hr zones plenty of times.

I should emphasis that the truck drivers behaving like this are a small minority. Most truck drivers I find to be excellent and very courteous road users.

However, because of the huge risk that idiot truck drivers pose to other road users due to the size of the vehicles, every effort needs to be made to get them off the road.
0
FollowupID: 673121

Follow Up By: Rob! - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 15:57

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 15:57
while greater police visibility and presence would be a deterant, that would pull police resources from concentrating on more serious crimes. Catching speeding vehicles is best done and processed by machines without any involvment from the police.
0
FollowupID: 673142

Follow Up By: Mr Pointyhead - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 16:15

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 16:15
When a police office pulls some one over they check the following

Is the driver Licensed ?
Is the vehicle registered ?
Does the vehicle have any obvious defects ?
Is the driver drunk ?
Is the driver under the influence of drugs ?
Is the vehicle overloaded ?
In the case of heavy vehicles, has the driver been having adequate rest stops.
etc etc.

The police office will then educate Driver as to why they are being pulled over.

Machines do none of these. Machines have their place, but they are not an adequate replacement for policing. Excessive use of speed cameras is a cop-out by politicians who do not provide enough funding to the police services to properly patrol the roads .

And remember, police on patrol enforce all the other road rules, not just speeding.

As for roads safety being less important than other offenses, I think the next of kin of the thousand odd Australians killed every year on the roads would beg to disagree. Not to mention the tens of thousands with serious injuries.



0
FollowupID: 673149

Follow Up By: Rob! - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 16:34

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 16:34
So the argument should be centred around whether the number of police officers doing speed (and other checks) has decreased with the introduction of speed cameras. Until we have those stats it's a fairly useless debate.

ie. Are speed cameras an additional way to fight crime or do they simply replace existing officers.
0
FollowupID: 673153

Follow Up By: Member - Morry H (WA) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 20:59

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 20:59
Mr Pointyhead

by golly was he was close are you sure of the mesurments ?

after 4200 ks around oz i missed all that fun my biggest beef is cars .
trucks i had no problem with and also radio contac sure woks for me regards
morry
Titan our wonderful traveling companion

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673212

Follow Up By: Member - Morry H (WA) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:01

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:01
hi made a blew should have read 42 thousand ks around oz
Titan our wonderful traveling companion

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673213

Follow Up By: Member - Morry H (WA) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:07

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:07
hi made a blew should have read 42 thousand ks around oz
Titan our wonderful traveling companion

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673217

Reply By: Member - Bushpig - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:54

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:54
Oh sigh.... there always here that have to take a cheap shot. Was not winging at being booked. I was illegally speeding. It was they way it was done. So to all those that needed to take a cheap shot at me...up yours.
AnswerID: 403601

Follow Up By: Lex M (Brisbane) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:00

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:00
quote "Was not winging at being booked"(sic)

quote "one of those hiiden revenue raisers."(sic)
quote "saw the theif (sic)"
quote "llegalised theft from the stealing police and Govt"
qoute "I find this episode that most outrageous thing "

I'd hate to see a post where you were whinging. :-)
0
FollowupID: 673107

Follow Up By: Member - Scoot (SA) - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 14:30

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 14:30
Bushpig just pay up mate SA needs your money . LOL
0
FollowupID: 673352

Reply By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:56

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 13:56
I love speed cameras .....

Thanks to the reliance on speed cameras for road safety, I can ...
( If I want to )

Drive on the wrong side of the road,
Leave the safety chain off the trailer,
Hang my arm out the window,
Slide around corners,
Forget the seatbelt,
Chuck rubbish out the window,
Drive slow enough to cause traffic buildups,
Leave the trailer lights disconnected,
Have an unregistered vehicle,
Drive around with what are they called here ... ohhh thats right ... bleeper lights LOL ... turned on unnescessarily.

and lots of other fun stuff .....

Well I could for 5.5hrs out of the 7hr trip to Sydney as the only Police Officer I ever see is the picture of one pasted up on a big billboard, warning me there is more Police on NSW roads.


Oh yeah ... speed cameras are the greatest .... for road safety ...... pffffftttt
AnswerID: 403604

Follow Up By: Lex M (Brisbane) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:07

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:07
There's no reason why you couldn't speed if you want to also.
I epect there wasn't a speed camera for 5.5hrs or more of the trip either
0
FollowupID: 673110

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:17

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:17
a couple regularly ... plus a couple of overhead setups.

And its OK .... Id only be naughty below the posted speed limit .... its too dangerous at speeds over 100kph ...... pfftttt
0
FollowupID: 673119

Reply By: craig2 - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:02

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:02
Well you'r lucky you don't live in Queensland. This year they going to start rolling out Point to Point cameras over a 5km stretchs or highway. The way they work is if your average speed is more than what they have calulated over that distance bingo they've got ya. You'll be one bleep ed off driver in a couple of weeks.

SO BE WARNED !!!
AnswerID: 403607

Follow Up By: Lex M (Brisbane) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:22

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 14:22
I believe they've had point to point for heavy vehicles in NSW at least for some time.
0
FollowupID: 673120

Follow Up By: Gramps - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:45

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:45
Craig2,

This has come up before (in NSW) and proven to be myth (at the moment). Do you have any credible sources for your information?

Regards
0
FollowupID: 673170

Follow Up By: Dave(NSW) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 18:38

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 18:38
Gramps,
Check here Site Link
GU RULES!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673180

Follow Up By: Gramps - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:08

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:08
Dave,

Thanks for that. I knew NSW had the Safe-T-Cams for heavy vehicles but I'm assuming Craig was inferring that a similar system was being implemented for smaller vehicles i.e. under 4.5 tons.

Eventually, I'm sure govts would love to have that sort of system implemented but up till now they've repeatedly denied it. I think Roozendahl was the last NSW minister to state that publicly.

Regards
0
FollowupID: 673183

Follow Up By: Dave(NSW) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:29

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:29
Gramps,
The Safe-T-Cam has the ability to track cars as well but it is not used, I think it has something to do with privacy laws, One day they will find a legal way around it but till then cars are left alone. Those cameras can see right into the back of the cab or read the name on your work shirt in fog that thick you can barely see the the front of your bonnet.
Cheers Dave...
GU RULES!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 673193

Follow Up By: Gramps - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:59

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:59
Dave,

Be careful who you let travel in the cab with you hahahahaha

It will more than likely be used on cars in the future even if they do bring in this new tax on kms travelled, as foreshadowed in the Henry Taxation Review, as well. That could be a real shocker.

Regards
0
FollowupID: 673198

Follow Up By: craig2 - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:21

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:21
Here is the link to the Article in the Couriel Mail

Article Courier Mail

0
FollowupID: 673219

Follow Up By: Gramps - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:35

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:35
Craig,

Woooohooooo, finally a State Govt with the stones to implement the technology in respect of cars rather than just heavy vehicles. It was only a matter of time. Vic and NSW will undoubtedly fall into line if the Qld implementation is successful.

Thanks for that.

Regards
0
FollowupID: 673222

Reply By: The Landy - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 16:39

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 16:39
This is a regular recurring thread; same horse…different eyebrows.

You are either speeding or you’re not, and it remains completely in your control as to whether you do or not. Yes I hear the arguments, I was only two kilometres over, or I was only 100 metres from a change in the legal speed limit, and it is only revenue raising…or I didn’t see the sign.

Speed cameras are here because it is far cheaper than having half our police force on the road to enforce speed limits. And let’s not go down that track…police cost money, so it comes down to priorities. I don’t want my taxes spent on police having to catch people simply because they think they are above a speeding fine. A speed camera performs that and catches all.

But what do people propose as an alternative? You can’t be half pregnant, so we either have speed limits and enforce them to the letter of the law, and bugger the consequences for those who break them, or we abolish all speed limits and let the masses determine the best speed to travel at.

The latter would certainly clear up all the aggro around speed fines, but I suspect we’d be paying dearly for it through an increase in serious injury and deaths from road accidents.

And yes…EO has the best drivers in the world, but what about the other 99% of the driving public – we still share the road with them.

Cheers
AnswerID: 403640

Follow Up By: Brakko - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:34

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:34
I found this in thread 75216 which is quite ironic really.

Member - Bushpig replied:

Do the math. Speed limit 100kph. Your speed 95 kph. 5kph for 5 hours equals 25 kms less than the speedsters. Extra time ...oh about 15mins. Slow down, save fuel, be more relaxed and virtually get there at the same time.

SA is a great state so how about taking a little of your own advice, slowing down and heading back there for a visit some time. Speed cameras are here to stay and they fulfill a purpose in the road safety picture.
0
FollowupID: 673168

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:13

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:13
> " You are either speeding or you’re not, and it remains completely in your control as to whether you do or not. Yes I hear the arguments, I was only two kilometres over, or I was only 100 metres from a change in the legal speed limit, and it is only revenue raising…or I didn’t see the sign. " " Speed cameras are here because it is far cheaper than having half our police force on the road to enforce speed limits. And let’s not go down that track…police cost money, so it comes down to priorities. I don’t want my taxes spent on police having to catch people simply because they think they are above a speeding fine. A speed camera performs that and catches all. "<


Sorry Landy ... I was always under the impression that police were on the road to enforce ALL road rules ..... maybe even spot the suspicious character wearing nothing but a trenchcoat loitering outside a school ... or maybe even see someone scampering from a block of units where some pensioner has just been robbed and raped.

A speed camera only does one job and certainly doesnt catch all.

Im quite happy to have my taxes spent on police .... and health .... and education etc .... would be a vast improvement on where ever they are spending it now.


Brakko ... Bushpig acknowledges his actual speed within the posted speed limit ... His post is about the underhanded methods used to extract revenue from motorists.

My thoughts are ... If such underhanded methods have to be used by the authorities ... then the REAL instances of speeding are probably much lower than we, the great unwashed, are led to believe.
0
FollowupID: 673185

Reply By: Gramps - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:40

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:40
Suck it up and get over it. You only got what you were lucky enough to get away with for 30 years. Good grief, you won't go broke and if you're such a professional driver your licence will be safe.

regards
AnswerID: 403650

Follow Up By: Tonyfish#58 - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 20:46

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 20:46
And for 30 years its been done safely

Just plain robbery is what it is!!!!

Speed cameras should not be near transition zones

Cheers Tony
0
FollowupID: 673210

Reply By: Outnabout.. - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:52

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:52
Jack haven't read all the threads but how fast were you booked at. At least in SA we get a greater speedo error tolerance than some other states. I got one interstate a few years back and was only 2k over the limit.
Sometimes ya just got to grin and bear it but it still hurts like hell. You have done the crime so just pay up. It will get put to some use for the benefits of us South Aussies.

David
AnswerID: 403651

Reply By: Member - Lionel A (WA) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:52

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 19:52
The crazy thing is, here in WA, I can assault someone, get the same fine but keep my points.

If your ever fustrated....dont speed......bash someone instead.

Pretty mixed up place I reckon.


Cheers......Lionel.

AnswerID: 403670

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:55

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:55
Thats an interesting comparison of laws ...

Makes ya wonder eh.

Now if on a murder charge one pleads not guilty ... coz "mummy used to lock me up under the stairs when I was little" ... and the charge is lessened ....

Then should that same dark cupboard, bleeding heart story also be able to get one down from a 130kph ticket to a 105kph ticket ... ???

LOL
0
FollowupID: 673331

Reply By: Best Off Road - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 20:23

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 20:23
I keep out of these debates as a rule.

However this gets up my nose.

The supposed issue is road safety. In fact in Victoria, speed cameras are referred to as "Safety Cameras".

If they were put in places of danger I wouldn't object to them, BUT, they are not. They are strategically placed where people may inadvertandly creep over the limit and hence generate revenue. Jack's example is a clasic case in point.

He's got a fair gripe.

Jim.



AnswerID: 403673

Reply By: craig2 - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:28

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 21:28
On another thing. It seems that all NEW cars that are sold now are doing up to 7% under the speed limit that is registering on your speedo. My brother inlaw installs a lot of in car phones and stereo systems in new cars when they come into Austraila. When he takes them for a drive he checks the spped with his GPS (which is very accurate) and every new car he has driven is under the speed that this is on the speedo.
I have also heard this from a couple of other sources as well.
AnswerID: 403682

Follow Up By: apriti00 - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:07

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:07
Yes I have also noted that my vehicles speedo is overstating the speed by about 8%, I raised the matter with Toyota and their reply was that it is within the ADR's. So then I asked how many k's is my warranty good for as I will be travelling 8% less than stated on the odometer, not to mention service intervals.
0
FollowupID: 673238

Follow Up By: disco driver - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 00:59

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 00:59
It's not just NEW cars.
That issue, incorrect speedo's, has been the subject of many a posting on here.
It has nothing to do with this post.

If you keep at or below your speedo reading you're not likely to get zapped.

Your odo is a mechanical device and is not as inaccurate as your speedo unless you've changed tyre sizes so the distance travelled is pretty close to accurate.

Disco.
0
FollowupID: 673256

Reply By: Bob of KAOS - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:12

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:12
To me this is another example of the stupidity of the law.

The purpose of the speed limit is to reflect the safe speed for worst driver in the worst vehicle in the worst conditions.

Do you believe that the appropriate speed changes from 60 or 50 to 80 kph in the thickness of the speed limit sign. Of course it doesn't, and any sensible application of the law would recognise that vehicles accelerate and decelerate around the signs. The signs are placed conservatively in acceptance of that fact.

To place a speed trap near the sign is a cynical exercise in revenue raising.

Some of anal retentives above who say 'the law is the law and you deserve everything you get' might ponder what the law is really trying to achieve. I believe road laws are designed to increase road safety, and are not really an end in themselves. If they are applied cynically, as they seem to have been in Jack's case, then all they achieve is alienating otherwise good drivers, and detracting from the road safety message. ie while they might raise revenue, they are likely to leave average drivers cynical about road laws and there application, thereby having a perverse effect on road safety.

I followed a road train south along the Stuart Hwy into Alice Springs a few months ago. The speed limit changes from 130 to 100 kph just north of the town. Just over a rise the police had set up a dinky little speed trap with witches hats marking lanes for the zapped miscreants to follow so they could be processed.

The road train (with me in its slip stream) had slowed to 100 but was unable to swerve to avoid the witches hats which went flying in all directions. I enjoyed the startled look on the coppers faces. I thought to myself "you silly p's (policemen ModSquad), here you are catching people decelerating in the middle of nowhere. Why aren't you in town where you might actually do some good?"
AnswerID: 403702

Follow Up By: The Landy - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 06:32

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 06:32
Hi Bob

Anal retentive...just a realist..

The issue is that if you don't enforce the law people will start breaking it...the old well they aren't watching say I'll do as I please. Was it safe in this instance, maybe it was, so what was the problem accelerating about 100/2000 metres before the speed change? Well if the speed limit isn't enforced, maybe next time around it will be 300/400 metres and before you know it people are not observing the speed limit at all.

But any way you cut this debate when it comes up, it simply boils down to this, like it or not we are stuck with speed cameras, and if you are going to break speed limits you may get cauight and fined. A bit like hitting your head against a brick wall, it hurts till you stop.

Perhaps we should also stop putting booze buses (RBTs) near pubs just in case we catch drink drivers.....

Cheers

0
FollowupID: 673265

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:33

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:33
Bob ???? .... Your post hasnt been deleted ???? ... And there is no reason for it to be either.

"anal retentive" may ruffle some feathers and probably - blind acquiescence or gullible acceptance may be more politically correct terms to use .... but the rest was very good.

Nobody who has posted in this thread has mentioned the right or the need to travel at speeds over the posted limit .... Its all about the underhanded methods used by those supposedly looking out for us ... in regards to road safety .... and many appear to be digusted by examples they have heard of or witnessed or experienced.

On the hand there is a group who appear to be religiously attracted to the message displayed on a speed zone and worship the misguided clergy implementing the magic numbers at their whim or the alignment of the planets or whatever ........ So perhaps instead of "anal retentive" ... you should have said "zealots" ????



Landy .... Whats the go ???? ... Your posts normally ooze forum ettiquette and rationale ... Yet in this thread your posts on the topic are giving me mind pictures .... you know the ones ... those images you see on SBS WW2 documentaries ... showing the expressions on the faces of people in cattle trucks headed to the gas chambers ... defeated, despondant, acceptance of a govts criminal acts ... that sort of thing.

And as for comparing sly camera / radar placement with .... booze buses ??? .... Thats a pollies trick - bundling bad and good things together in conversation/comments to lessen the impact / distract attention from the bad thing.

If speed traps were an activity run by private business .... There would be an uproar involving Trade Practices, Fair Trading, lawsuits, civil action etc ... but of course the operation of one of the biggest money spinners for govt is protected and enshrined in legislation.

In my own case ... when it comes to travelling over the posted speed limit I have always copped it sweet ... so to speak ... but that does not include the occasions where the offence has been orchestrated for the sake of revenue .... and the orchestrations outnumber the tickets from deliberate and planned 110kph-120kph overtaking procedures many times over.

And as for this .....

" But any way you cut this debate when it comes up, it simply boils down to this, like it or not we are stuck with speed cameras, and if you are going to break speed limits you may get cauight and fined. A bit like hitting your head against a brick wall, it hurts till you stop. "

Theres a big difference between breaking a speed limit and being set up ...

Interstate travellers beware ... The Vehicle Inspection Station/Layby just out of Coonabarabran NSW, which has a variable speed zone, within the 100kph posted limit, for when the station is operating ......

Was through there yesterday and noticed from the distance that the station was not in use ... and then when closer ... realised that some forgetful RTA person had neglected to cover the badly placed, lower, speed limit sign back up.

HAH !!!!! .... in actual fact .... There was a police officer in an unmarked car selecting interstate number plates from groups of same speed (95kph-100kph) vehicles and issueing 30kph over the limit tickets to them.

Now thats really ... what did you call it Landy ???? .... ohhhhh yeahhhhh .... " enforcing the law " ...
0
FollowupID: 673326

Follow Up By: The Landy - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:31

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:31
OzTroopy

Thankyou for the compliments and I assure you nothing has changed, I’m still looking at this logically….

This type of thread seems to be all about generating sympathy for getting caught out with the ‘Stupidity Tax’ – and that is what a speeding fine boils down to these days. Mind you, perhaps we could save some sympathy for the victims and families of horrific road accidents that all too often involve speed.

The authorities can argue their case for putting speed cameras in, and I’m sure they are armed with the data to do so, that is their job, not mine – but whether it comes down to safety or revenue raiser, what difference does it make if caught? We all know the rules, like them or not. Agitate to your local MP that you want the law changed or place your protest vote at the polling booth. But whinging on EO every time someone gets a fine in the mail, and arguing it was unfair or sneaky does what?

Perhaps the counter-argument is it is just as sneaky accelerating before the speed limit changes….or nudging up the speed to 5ks over the posted limit. You see human nature being what it is it won’t matter what the speed limit is, or were the speed signs change, there will be those who will simply flaunt it. I said earlier, perhaps we should just abolish all speed limits and let drivers’ decide the best speed to travel at. Unfortunately we will simply transfer the cost, in that instance, from a monetary one, to one we will end up counting in human toll. Trouble with a perfect world is it doesn’t exist, so we need rules, like them or not!

So, why don’t we just call speeding fines a (stupidity) tax for slow learners…and move on.

And I mean no offence to EO readers…but this is the harsh reality of speed and red camera devices in this day and age! A user pays tax for those silly enough to flout the road rules (as laid down by the authorities)…..

Best regards, The Landy….
0
FollowupID: 673335

Follow Up By: anglepole - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 14:42

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 14:42
Well said Bob. I hope all those really law abiding citizens do not ever drive down Jetty Road at Glenelg in SA.

In SA it is against the law to drive on tram tracks. But due to foot path extensions for those who get on or off the tram you have to drive on the tracks on this road.

Should all motorists be fined for driving down this road?
0
FollowupID: 673355

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 15:06

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 15:06
Heya Landy

.....and complimentary it was meant to be ......... and questioning.

The thread issue is the illegitimate but legal use of the equipment rather than ... should speed cameras/radars be allowed ?

LOGICALLY ... They should be allowed ... when used CORRECTLY.

Cameras and Radars are here to stay ... Afterall, one doesnt turn off the milking machine while the cows with milk are still hooked up ... do they ???

Abolishing speed limits ??? ... nahhhh ... but abolishing all but two and providing dvr education in regard to vehicle speed/environment regardless of the posted limit may be a good thing .... but thats another topic.

Whinging on EO about illegitimate use of the eqpt ???? ..... who knows ... perhaps if theres enough of it, the tide will turn and the eqpt will get used legitimately as well as legally .... Forum power and the follow on seemed to achieve a result with the outlandish NSW suspension proposal.
0
FollowupID: 673358

Follow Up By: The Landy - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 15:27

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 15:27
And I return the compliment, of course.

However, for as long as the front-pages of our daily papers have pictures of cars wrapped around telegraph poles, and someones son & daughter being carted off to a morgue, I doubt our politicians will loosen speeding laws.

In fact from everything I read suggests there are more 'devices' about to be inflicted upon us.

Anectodal evidence suggest mobile speed cameras are changing people's behaviour, and occurences like the one that started this thread will be the outcome of 'intense policing'.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 673361

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 16:10

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 16:10
My last follow up on this I think ....

hmmmmm ... Is that a collective EO sigh of relief I hear ????



Yep ... Nothing like harsh images and some mispresented / sensationalised facts to sway social engineering.

A loosening of the speeding laws is not whats required ... or even suggested in this thread ... well not by me anyway ....

Its the accountability by the operators / placement staff for the positioning and use of the equipment that needs tightening up ... as in cases such as Bushpigs and my example from yesterday.

I respect ... and as above - even agree ... with your insistence/acceptance of the continued use of the equipment and even to a degree its nescessity ... however you seem to be falling back on that ... rather than being concerned at its misuse.


0
FollowupID: 673364

Reply By: BuggerBoggedAgain - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:16

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:16
Just my two bits worth,

Whilst living in a small country town for 15 yrs, (pop 500) it never cease to amaze me when long week-ends or school holidays arrived so did the idiots from the cities, our town has been designated 60 kph from each end totalling 4 klms, but this is toooooooooooo slow for the idiots.

I kid you not, me and SWMBO sat on our verandah and watched 2 x 4WD, one with 12' caravan, one with twin outboard motor boat, racing, racing mind you, the caravan 4WD would have to be doing 120-130 kph, the boat 4WD was doing at least 140-160 kph to overtake the other idiot, all along a straight stretch going up a slight rise towards the country club on the Bucketts Way.

The mind boggles as to what these two idiot drivers thought of their passengers-families that they had to break all laws in road safety, it only needed some child running after a ball, a child on a horse crossing the road,. these two idiots would NOT have any time to correct any mistakes.

they were going so fast, I did not get their rego numbers, believe me, you can take rego numbers of anyone breaking the law, BUT, you must be able to attend Court if the perpetrator contests the fine.

If anyone thinks 60 or 50 is too slow to drive through a country town regardless of how many ppl live there, then it is time to hand back your licence.
Whenever I drove through country town, I was always at least 10kph below posted signs, at 100 kph I need 200 mts to stop, so at 50- not as much, depending if I was loaded or MT, but, always looking 200 mts ahead, watching side streets and kids during holidays, also have been driving over semi's for 30 yrs, trucks 37 yrs and haven't been booked in any State of Australia.
AnswerID: 403704

Reply By: Member - Mal and Di (SA) - Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:30

Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 at 23:30
I finally have gotten to the bottom of this thread where I can make a comment.
Nothing about speed cameras and such, just sad to think that Bush Pig is leaving our state. I am sure that he would have been to some great spots on his way to Coobowie and I am sure on his way out he will have been pleasantly surprised before he hit the border ( which ever way he went). I just hope that by the time he hit the top of YP he had calmed down and begun to appreciate what we DO have here in SA.
M.
AnswerID: 403706

Reply By: Bob of KAOS - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 06:43

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 06:43
To me this is another example of the stupidity of the law.

The purpose of the speed limit is to reflect the safe speed for worst driver in the worst vehicle in the worst conditions.

Do you believe that the appropriate speed changes from 60 or 50 to 80 kph in the thickness of the speed limit sign. Of course it doesn't, and any sensible application of the law would recognise that vehicles accelerate and decelerate around the signs. The signs are placed conservatively in acceptance of that fact.

To place a speed trap near the sign is a cynical exercise in revenue raising.

Some of anal retentives above who say 'the law is the law and you deserve everything you get' might ponder what the law is really trying to achieve. I believe road laws are designed to increase road safety, and are not really an end in themselves. If they are applied cynically, as they seem to have been in Jack's case, then all they achieve is alienating otherwise good drivers, and detracting from the road safety message. ie while they might raise revenue, they are likely to leave average drivers cynical about road laws and there application, thereby having a perverse effect on road safety.

I followed a road train south along the Stuart Hwy into Alice Springs a few months ago. The speed limit changes from 130 to 100 kph just north of the town. Just over a rise the police had set up a dinky little speed trap with witches hats marking lanes for the zapped miscreants to follow so they could be processed.

The road train (with me in its slip stream) had slowed to 100 but was unable to swerve to avoid the witches hats which went flying in all directions. I enjoyed the startled look on the coppers faces. I thought to myself "you silly p's (policemen ModSquad), here you are catching people decelerating in the middle of nowhere. Why aren't you in town where you might actually do some good?"
AnswerID: 403717

Follow Up By: Bob of KAOS - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 06:44

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 06:44
Sorry- EO locked up last so I went to bed and sent this again this am but it already eventually got there.
0
FollowupID: 673267

Reply By: Member - Beatit (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 09:35

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 09:35
I know the purpose of this thread is to highlight the underhanded nature of these traps and certainly it is a fair point that these cameras are just revenue raisers. The points I want to make is that,

a) There is hardly a need for this sneakiness as some of the highest revenue raising cameras in this state are visible ones – ie people are clearly speeding even when they’re warned by heaps of signs that there is a camera.
b) The other is the constant speed reduction on some roads. I know of roads that have been reduced from 100 to 70 over time and in all fairness the road condition has not changed.
c) I think that technology has made speeding fines a “money for jam” item for state governments and that it is quite easy for them to create the circumstance to justify the fines. Policing is not like it used to be!

I have adjusted in line with the new approach of high tech enforcement. It is a shame that the only argument put forward is that if you don’t break the law then you won’t get booked when clearly the law gets all screwed up on occasions and a little leniency would be in order.

Kind regards
AnswerID: 403735

Reply By: get outmore - Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:57

Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:57
I was gonna get up on a soap box till i reminded my self i do exactly the same thing.

you make sure your doing the right speed approaching a town as much out of common sense but also because a cop with a radar (never actually seen a camera out bush)

will be checking your speed where it counts


Somwhere just before the built up area starts on some strategic bend or hill.

the 60-80-110 zones as you leave town are usually just there to match the slow down speeds for the town
AnswerID: 403756

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)