Speed Camera

Submitted: Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 13:43
ThreadID: 76318 Views:3836 Replies:10 FollowUps:36
This Thread has been Archived
Received this email this morning....is this really going to make people drive slower or are they looking to cash in again?

There will be 7 new speed camera locations being tested in the south-east corner over the coming weeks and if
successful will be operational by mid 2010 and then will be rolled out through the rest of the state. These will be:

TWO COMBINED RED LIGHT/SPEED CAMERAS -
Cnr Waterworks Road and Jubilee Terrace, Ashgrove
Cnr Beaudesert Road and Compton Road, Calamvale

THREE SPOT FIXED SPEED CAMERAS
Pacific Motorway, Loganholme
Gateway Arterial Road, Nudgee
Clem7 Tunnel, Woolloongabba to Bowen Hills

ONE MOBILE SPEED CAMERA - used at varying locations

ONE POINT-TO- POINT SPEED CAMERA SYSTEM
Bruce Highway, Caloundra Road to Wild Horse Mountain, Beerburrum
A point-to-point (or average) speed camera system uses a number of cameras over a length of road to measure a
vehicle's average speed. The system uses the time it takes for a vehicle to travel between the two points to
calculate the average speed of the vehicle: Speed = Distance/Time.
Point-to-point speed camera systems use a number of cameras mounted at staged intervals along a particular
route. Point-to-point camera systems, like fixed speed cameras, are monitoring traffic 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
However, unlike current fixed speed cameras, point-to-point systems are not activated when a vehicle violates
the speed limit at a given point in time measured by a speed detection device. Rather, point-to-point camera
systems apply a mathematical calculation based on the time it takes for a vehicle to travel from one camera to
the next and the distance between the cameras.
The first length of road the system will cover is approximately 13km.
Please exercise some common sense when driving particularly through these locations and avoid any
infringements. The new locations will be digital processors so if an infringement is detected the images are
uploaded instantly to the infringements processing centre and you receive notification with 2-3 days.
Currently with the wet-film system these can take up to 4 weeks.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Phil B (WA) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 13:53

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 13:53
Sorry to say i have no sympathy for speeders- if you speed you pay - don't speed and you wont.

If there weren't any cameras the result would be even more speeding, would it not?

On the other hand speeders help contribute money to the system that helps keep other taxes down a bit - lol.

Phil
There is a lot of difference between
‘Human Being’ and ‘Being Human’.





Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 405932

Follow Up By: Member - Troll 81 (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 13:57

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 13:57
No sympathy from me either...it's just funny when you are driving along and you see the camera everyone slows down....my GPS even tells me there is one coming up
0
FollowupID: 675609

Follow Up By: Member - joc45 (WA) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:14

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:14
Agreed. Also red-light cameras:
I nearly got T-boned a couple of years back from someone running a red light. Missed by cms. There was a camera at the intersection, so hopefully the culprit was pinged and charged.

0
FollowupID: 675614

Follow Up By: Camoco - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:22

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:22
I completely agree with Red Light Cameras.

I do not agree with Speed Cameras that give you no leniency. I say that because there are a number of factors associated with speeding.

I am against reckless and determined speeding, however I am understanding that because of the many factors, I am against accidental speeding. In other words, getting pinged for speeding when there was no intent, or your intent was not to speed, and thought you were not speeding when you get pinged.

The factors include, tyre wear, speed increase through terrain (hills), wind change (suddenly no front wind allowing you to speed up inadvertantly) mechanical calibration to name a few.

I have never been "caught" for speeding and I try my best to avoid it as much as possible. However there are times when you do and notice it, and slow down accordingly, and there are times when you think all is well and then get a notice in the mail. That is what I object to.
Those that say book all speeders are just too perfect for me.

If there was leniency along the percentage line of the ADR's then I am all for them, and if you set your cruise to the limit plus 10% and get caught, then that is speeding with intent in my book.

Cheers Cam.
0
FollowupID: 675617

Follow Up By: Member - Allan B (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 15:04

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 15:04
I'm with Phil....... don't speed and you will have no issue.

When passed on the highway I think "Go ahead mate, pay my taxes".

Cheers
Allan

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675628

Follow Up By: That Troopy Bloke (SA) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:55

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:55
Tyre wear??? care to elaborate for us please Cam?

Cheers
Glenn
0
FollowupID: 675644

Follow Up By: vk1dx - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:17

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:17
Tyre wear.

Are you saying the the smaller circumpherance of a worn tyre is a factor that can lead you to speed??

I (killing himself with laughter ) should try that one. Problem Last booked in 1979. So you may have to wait for a whil until I test your theory.

I will say though the loss of the allowance to go "temporarily" above the speed limit when overtaking can be dangerous. Maybe thats how that woman got hurt up the the Blue Mountains the other day.

But Thats the law.

Phil
0
FollowupID: 675651

Follow Up By: Camoco - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 20:57

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 20:57
Well, by tyre wear I was meaning the difference between a measured speed at one point in time of a tyres life and another. Also that two tyres, being the old and the new will not be the same diameter. You may calibrate with new, mid worn or older tyres and then once changed or aged, your speed will be different.

Law or not, are we all so perfect that we are happy to pay a fine when we think we are doing the right thing? As I said, I am lucky to have not been fined, but there will come a day when my number is up, and I guarantee I will firmly believe I was not speeding.

Have you guys never broken a law ever??? I doubt it. Whether you wanted to or not.
Pfft.
0
FollowupID: 675718

Follow Up By: Dave(NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:29

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:29
When I put larger tyre's on and the speedo read 100 I was actually doing 107, So if I had standard tyres on and they were worn to a smaller size I should be going slower.
GU RULES!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675727

Follow Up By: vk1dx - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 22:39

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 22:39
I use the GPS. Who cares what the tyres are or what the speedo says. Or even whether I used the 4 PSI rule or not (whatever that is). Nor what the tyre pressure is. Totally irrelevant. The GPS display the actual speed on all screens.

And I stay under the limit - Not on it.

Unless I am having one of my nanny naps and dropped the remote. Stupid electronic gadgets. One just cannot trust then can one??? You would think with all the computerised stuff that the car would know it was speeding. Wasn't me Officer. I was in the back.

This comment is for the pedantic person who always seems to be around. Yes I have sped, but not purposely.

Phil
0
FollowupID: 675744

Reply By: signman - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:01

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:01
The Combined red light/speed cameras are now called 'Safety Cameras' here in NSW....
AnswerID: 405934

Reply By: George_M - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:05

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 14:05
To answer your question, T81 - No and Yes:-)

G
Come any closer and I'll rip your throat out!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 405935

Reply By: vk1dx - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 15:42

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 15:42
Answer as above. No and yes in that order.

Excellent idea.

No sypmathy for speeders or infact anyone else being found guilty of breaking a law. I especially like the red light ones. I always laugh when they claim they did know they had to attempt to stop on an orange. Thickheads.

Phil
AnswerID: 405958

Follow Up By: Kumunara (NT) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:01

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:01
Phil


I agree with you.

Driver should know the law. If the lights turn to amber you are required to stop if safe to do so.

I like the term thickheads. I initially thought it might be a spelling mistake.



Tjilpi
Life's great and it just keeps getting better

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675646

Reply By: Rob! - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 15:48

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 15:48
If you were to view any moderately busy intersection you will find that 9 times out of ten the last car to cross runs a red light. And to do that crossing, they almost always go way over the speed limit (only to put the breaks on after they crossed.)

The more cameras at intersections the better, I think.
AnswerID: 405959

Follow Up By: nowimnumberone - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:32

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:32
i have a certain way of doing road tests for work the last turn is an intersection with traffic lights.if you miss the light its 2 minutes till they change again time after time after time cars go through on red .the other day i was taking a police car for a road test and the car two cars in front of me was about to go on the red when he must have seen me at the last second and ive never seen a car stop so quick.i found it funny
cheers
0
FollowupID: 675687

Reply By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:18

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:18
Come on Guys its all in the name of MONEY. Motorist are an easy target any time the Gov wants a few extra Bucks.

I am not in favor of reckless driving or of excessive speed. But the majority of accidents are caused by people not watching what they are doing, traveling too close to the vehicle in front and driving too fast for the conditions or being impatient

The authorities are lowering the speed limit on roads that were previously 100KPH to 80kph in many places and the only reason is someone was killed on a corner that can be taken at 95kph but the guy was doing 130+ at the time.

School zones are everywhere and some of the signage warning the driver that they are approaching a school zone are a joke. Only a few have a flashing sign to warn a driver. If the Gov were serious that would have these signs at all School Zones.

Anyone who says they never speed is a liar or they drive a HJ80 Non turbo Diesel Lancuiser.

Cheers
Wayne B
AnswerID: 405961

Follow Up By: Member - Allan B (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:46

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:46
Well, no. I don't speed because I can't really afford the fine.
And yes, not a HJ80 but a HZJ78 Troopie which is even worse!

But Wayne, not everybody licensed to drive is a trained and experienced rally driver.

As the force of impact is proportional to the square of the speed then any few k's off the speed of the clown who hits me is a bonus. Fine the *rse off them I say!

Cheers
Allan

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675642

Follow Up By: Rob! - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:52

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:52
Don't these speed / red light cameras penelise people who are:
"not watching what they are doing... driving too fast for the conditions or being impatient?" Therefore reducing the risk of accidents?
0
FollowupID: 675643

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:19

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:19
Allan
I dont know what the answer is in reducing the road toll. I have my ideas but if they were imposed there would only be 50% of the current drivers licensed to drive. Driving is not a god given right, its a privilege.

I agree if you hit something solid at 100KPH then you are history. 80KPH is not much better, in fact the human body can only cope with a 15kph dead stop after that the internal organs become detached.

I just think the authorities put too much effort into enforcing speeding and they do this because it is easy to police and there is very little public backlash politically .
Try taking someone to court for inattentive driving!!! how do the police prove this charge, way toooo hard for them.

There are too many speed zones. Not far from where I live there are 5 (yes that correct 5) changes in speed zones in 1.5km. Now is that common sense, I dont think so.

Cheers Mate
Wayne B
0
FollowupID: 675652

Follow Up By: Member - Allan B (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:50

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:50
Yes, actually Wayne I agree with much of what you say.

With the reality of the road toll the authorities are expected to do something about it and as with any Public Service action the easiest and financially optimal action is implemented. In other words, they decline to bite the bullet and take action which will be effective but unpopular.

To gain a driver's licence it is more important to demonstrate an ability to park correctly or to be able to start on a hill than it is to be able to react properly to an unexpected hazard or control a skid. The public in general DO see driving as a God-given right rather than a privilege to be earned after demonstrating true competence.

Industry is required to train and test potential operators of hazardous equipment before they are permitted to become actual operators and look at the effort required to obtain an aircraft pilot licence even though it is easier to safely operate an aircraft than motor vehicle. So why on earth do we permit ill-trained drivers to get behind the wheel of motor vehicles. I am quite sure that the cost of adequate driver training would be much less than the cost of traffic policing and the cost of road accidents and trauma.

Clearly it should be required to submit to Advanced Driver Training before being let loose on the roads. Not only would we have more competent drivers but there would be the bonus of a lot less drivers on the road.

Cheers
Allan

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675656

Follow Up By: Rob! - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:59

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:59
It is notso much the training but the attitude that separates bad and good drivers. it has been shown that advanced driver training simply teaches dangerous drivers more risky manouvers.

The answer might lie in everybody having a psychological assesment of their driving attitude every year. It would be effective but unpopular, and the following election would be won by the party that would bin this procedure.

As they say, we deserve the goverment we get.
0
FollowupID: 675658

Follow Up By: Member - Allan B (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:05

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:05
Yes Rob, psychological assessment has long been part of my argument and I should have included it in my post above.

Furthermore, those psychological assessed motorists would then be competent to elect the next government without assistance from the hopeless rest of the population!!!!

Cheers
Allan

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675659

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:28

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:28
Just watching the News.

Transport Minister stating Speeding in School zones a problem with over 145,000 people charges last year and he wants to introduce mobile cameras.
When asked if flashing lights and fixed cameras would be a better idea he agreed but said it was too expensive.

When asked why people were speeding in school zones he said : Quote "They either don't know the school zone is there or they don't think they will get caught."

So we just hide the school zones and set up mobile cameras to catch the unwary.

That my friends is Politics for you.
0
FollowupID: 675666

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:47

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:47
Rob Said.
It is notso much the training but the attitude that separates bad and good drivers. it has been shown that advanced driver training simply teaches dangerous drivers more risky manouvers.

That has always been an argument against advanced driving and I agree in principal.

However My idea of advanced driving is experiencing FIRST HAND in a controlled environment what happens when you encounter one of the following.

1. Experience a Tyre blow out at 100KPH

2. Accelerator Jammed full on. ( I just had a discussion with my neighbor about the TOYOTA problems in America. I asked went he would do, he went through things like standing on the brakes and taking it out of gear. I said what about turning the Key off. He said Oh no I would not do that the steering would lock.
I pointed out that the steering will not lock unless the Key is actually removed. He did not believe me until I demonstrated the situation with his Nissan Patrol.
Could it be that these people that have been killed did not turn the key off thinking the steering would lock. Simple things like this are DRIVER TRAINING not going sideways at 200KPH.

3. Drive around a off camber roundabout in the wet with some diesel on the road.

4. Experience aquaplaning at 100KPH

5. Experience trying to turn the vehicle with the wheels locked up.

6. Teach people to respect the 3 second distance rule between vehicles

7. Teach people some basic coordination. Eg other then for medical reasons, if you cant drive a MANUAL vehicle you should not be driving.

These are the things I call Driver Training. Not trying to turn out 50,000 Peter Brocks.

Off my soap box now

Cheers
Wayne B




0
FollowupID: 675672

Follow Up By: Member - joc45 (WA) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:41

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:41
Hi Wayne,
not all advanced driver training courses teach risky manouvres, as you suggest. Years ago (many!), I did a Safe Driving course with the NSC in Perth, which covered most of the things you describe. The course included an oily skid pan and how to steer out of a slide, avoiding skids, correcting a skid properly on gravel, defensive driving techniques, safe distances, etc. None of it was about doing handbrake turns at 100k, etc :-). I thought I knew it all, but learned a lot on the course.
Gerry

0
FollowupID: 675691

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:31

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:31
Jock45
100% spot on. That is exactly what Driver training is about. There is simply not enough of this type of training.
Cheers Mate
Wayne B
0
FollowupID: 675728

Follow Up By: crd patrol - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:40

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:40
WayneB,

Mate, while I agree with most of your comments/points here this one I have a beef with....7. Teach people some basic coordination. Eg other then for medical reasons, if you cant drive a MANUAL vehicle you should not be driving.

Mate I have no legs (albeit artificial ones), am usually in a wheelchair, so how do I and people like me go with this one.
1. The government won't allow me to use my artificial legs to control the pedals.
2. I am only allowed to drive an automatic vehicle (I would dearly love to be able to drive a manual vehicle, but as there is no legal way for me to achieve this in Queensland then I am stuck with an auto)
3.There is no device in Queensland (that is legal) that actually enables us to drive a manual. There is a hand control from Europe that I think can do this but it has not been given permission by the state government to use it in our state.
4. Public transport for people with disabilities really sux unless you live in a big town or the cities.

crd
0
FollowupID: 675730

Follow Up By: crd patrol - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:43

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:43
Wayne,

Mate sorry about that, just re-read your point 7. I am having a real bad day. Need sleep....

crd
0
FollowupID: 675732

Follow Up By: Rob! - Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 09:29

Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 09:29
Advanced driver training doesn't necessarily teach handbrake slide, but as you said teaches how to recover from difficult situations. The issue is that SOME people then happily put their cars into difficuclt situations thinking that they now know how to get out of them. Again, it all comes down to the attitude of the driver whther advanced driver training increases safety or does the opposite.
0
FollowupID: 675788

Reply By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:16

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:16
Point to point cameras are a great idea....... Michael
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired 2016 and now Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 405975

Follow Up By: ChrisE - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:56

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:56
Your kidding.
Have you ever driven on a road that has them???
You end up with everyone sitting in groups, side by side doing +/-1 km/hr of each other, instead of people doing the extra few k's to get past another car and back into the left lane and in their own space.
0
FollowupID: 675675

Follow Up By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:16

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:16
It may just stop some fool overtaking on double linesor on a crest and save some lives.. possible yours.. or more importantly, mine or someone in my family.. Michael
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired 2016 and now Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675680

Follow Up By: ChrisE - Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 09:12

Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 09:12
I haven't seen any on a non-divided road, only on dual lane, dual carriageway divided roads (Hume in Vic), and I doubt they ever will as there would be too many variables, so has nothing to do with someone overtaking on double lines.
Only thing they do is they then take the coppers off the road to save hiring more coppers, and as a side "benefit" there statistics look better that they are catching more people speeding and this justifies more cameras, but you then don't have the coppers on the road to see the other stuff that goes on that has far worse implications like drivers that are all over the place affected by some substance or not using indicators or failing to keep left - how do the cameras detect these???
I don't think for one second that a camera saves a life, but what could save a life is to get the coppers back in marked cars, driving down the freeway instead of putting in cameras or hiding the coppers behind bushes.
0
FollowupID: 675783

Follow Up By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 19:50

Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 19:50
Chris, some of your points are valid but i dont want to have to go to a funeral of someone i know because of a third party that speeding or being stupid on the road.. the road toll should be ZERO or close to it. Anything that stops people being stupid on the road is a good thing!!!!! Michael
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired 2016 and now Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675894

Follow Up By: ChrisE - Saturday, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:00

Saturday, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:00
Michael, no one want s to go to funerals, BUT the road toll will NEVER be zero, and the sooner that politicians and the general public realise this and get over it the sooner the cops can spend more time actually focusing their effeorts on things that are dangerous and not spend so much time trying to book someone for doing a couple of k's over the limit.

The "Darwin Awards" prove that the nature of humans means there will never be a zero road toll - there will always be someone that does something stupid and necks themselves, and hopefully it is only themselves and not an inocent third party.
0
FollowupID: 676019

Reply By: OREJAP - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:21

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:21
Send them broke. Don't speed.
AnswerID: 405977

Reply By: DIO - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:23

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:23
By using a combination of accelerator, brake, speedometer and common sense it is possible to avoid activating the speed cameras. Remember, with traffic lights (red light cameras), unless your vehicle is over the white line (actually partially in the intersection/junction - perhaps waiting to turn right) entering same on a yellow light will incur the same penalty as going through a red light.
Anything used by authorities to reduce speed, make our roads safer and hopefully eliminate deaths resulting from motor vehicle collisions is OK by me.
AnswerID: 405987

Follow Up By: Member - Allan B (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:29

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 18:29
You sure you got that right? "entering same on a yellow light will incur the same penalty as going through a red light."

So I'm one metre before the white line, doing 50kph, and the light changes to amber. I am expected to stop my vehicle in one metre to avoid penalty? Come-on!

Cheers
Allan

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675667

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:03

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 19:03
Allan

A young girl was killed near my home the other day. She braked Hard for a Amber Light, The truck behind her could not stop.

In teaching my daughter to drive I use to get up her if she did not look in the rear view mirror before barking for a Amber Light. I am proud of the fact that she went through her Red and Green P plates with no infringements and better still not even a scratch on her Hyundai Getz. God willing she will continue in this way.

I am sorry guys for waffling on about this subject but I am passionate about driving and road safety and I just think the authorities are taking the easy way out.

Cheers
Wayne B
0
FollowupID: 675679

Follow Up By: Member - Allan B (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 20:51

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 20:51
Er Wayne, I'm not sure of the point of what you are saying to me.

DIO that if you enter an intersection on a yellow light you will attract a penalty. This is not correct and I gave an example of how a driver may have no option but to enter on an amber light.

I have no issue with what you said but am I missing a point in how it relates to what I said to DIO?

Cheers
Allan

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675714

Follow Up By: Member - Allan B (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 20:56

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 20:56
DIO said.......etc

Cheers
Allan

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 675717

Follow Up By: Camoco - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:09

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:09
I hate to say it but DIO is partly right.
We had a blitz here recently whereby if you went through on an amber and it was safe for you to stop and didn't, you were fined for running a RED light.

My understanding is the amber is to indicate that the light is going to go red. If you can stop safely, then do so as it is no longer green. If you cannot stop safely, then maintain your speed and continue.
They usually stay amber for much longer than the stopping time, yet people think they can run the light and bo OK so long as it is not red. That is not the legal option.
0
FollowupID: 675720

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:19

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 21:19
No problem Allan
I was agreeing with you and just pointing out the futility of jamming on the brakes instead of proceeding through a Amber Light. Again common sense should dictate if you can stop safely or not.

The point with my daughter is I told her that if she looked in the Mirror and all she could see was the word "MAC", or a funny looking shiny "Bulldog" whatever you do dont stop just keep on going through the Amber light. ;-)
Cheers
Wayne
0
FollowupID: 675723

Follow Up By: Bob of KAOS - Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 22:52

Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 22:52
Wayne

I'm with you mate.

The road rules are drafted by idiots and mostly enforced by cowboys.

Apart from a minor rear end at a round about I've never had a crash in over 40 yrs of fanging around. The idiot in front took off but then decided to stop and wait for someone approaching the roundabout from the right. Of course because he had taken off I was looking right to see if I had to give way to anyone.

I'd have to say that I exceed the speed limit every time I get in the vehicle. I take driving very seriously and concentrate 100% on what I'm doing. I've done several advanced driver courses. Frankly, I'd prefer the roads were choc a bloc with drivers like me (who drive to the conditions), rather than idiots who stick religiously to arbitrarily set speed limits. The upshot would be a zero road toll, and the panel beaters would be switching to roof insulating to make a quid.

I am currently sitting on zero points. Spotting revenue cameras and the whalloppers is part of being hyper- vigilant behind the wheel.

Bob
0
FollowupID: 675747

Reply By: cycadcenter - Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 00:14

Friday, Feb 26, 2010 at 00:14
Here in California some cities have been found to be manipulating the length of the amber light where red light cameras are installed. in some cases reducing the length of the amber light by up to 20% RESULTING IN AN INCREASE in infringment notices by 70%

Now I don't think that is fair.

Bruce



AnswerID: 406078

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)