My theory for speed cameras; Part 1!

[50thturbo]

of course speed cameras are revenue raisers if not y put them on a straight stretch of road where there has not been a crash and y do the goverment allow us to drive fast cars when the limit is like 110 on hways y dont they just limit cars to 110 some one here most likly has said this but y tell me y its so they can line thier own pockets yes they do how much was your last pay rise and how much and when was theirs the only people that need speed is cops ambos and doctors anyway thats my say

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

As part of your arguement are you saying we should have no road rules?
100kmh in a school zone? No traffic lights?

That is complete nonsense. There are school speed limits here of 20mph, there are bright flashing lights telling you when that speed limit is in effect. It works, everyone slows down and obeys. There are no speed cameras here. It works. Sometimes the cops sit there just to be present, which is good. Not taking advantage of peoples forgetfulness, and telling you that you broke the law 2 weeks ago. How is that going to save a kids life? 1 sends a clear message that it's about safety, the other sends a clear message that they would rather have the money.
When they get the benefit of revenue, their credibility on safety is completely destroyed.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by chevypower

Not taking advantage of peoples forgetfulness, and telling you that you broke the law 2 weeks ago. How is that going to save a kids life? .

Unfortunately people many people here see the 40km/h illuminated sign outside a school and slow down from about 65km/h to 50km/h, is that really forgetfulness, no its just arrogance and selfish behaviour, if people could follow simple regs speed cameras or traffic police wouldnt be necessary, but alas there are some that the laws dont apply to.

Oh, the old argument that because they dont fine me immediately makes the speeding fine pointless because they could of gone on to kill thousands in the mean time? But you dont have a problem that every piece of road in your country is not currently monitored by patrol cars or cameras to catch these killers?

I think you are confusing human behaviour with that of dogs or small children. Discipline a dog or small child for something it did wrong 2 weeks ago, waste of time.

But humans we let on the road, most will have the mental powers to process that the speeding infringement was for something they did 2 weeks ago and that doing it again will result in more pain, it changes the long term behaviour of many people in 2 weeks that years of safe driving lectures couldnt!

Originally Posted by chevypower

Sometimes the cops sit there just to be present, which is good. .

So we only have people obeying laws when they see police cars, how many miles of road and school crossings are in your country?

Basically if we create an environment where people believe they could be detected anywhere then they will be more likely to comply more often, baffling logic I know.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

What does this have to do with speed cameras?
Speed limits were set in road laws decades before people thought of speed cameras. Speed limits were set as part of the road rules.
As part of your arguement are you saying we should have no road rules?
100kmh in a school zone? No traffic lights?

In an ideal world, where drivers drove with due attention and care, we'd have no need for speed-limits whatsoever.

[XDV800]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

In an ideal world, where drivers drove with due attention and care, we'd have no need for speed-limits whatsoever.

[2011G6E]

Sometimes they let the cat out of the bag about speed cameras and thier useless way of doing things without even noticing it...

A few years back, there was a "road safety" advert that ran for about six weeks before being pulled. It showed a man driving along a highway at about 115kph, and going past a speed camera hidden in the bushes. It goes off, and he keeps driving off along the country road. It then fades out.
When it fades up again, the guy is driving along and approaches a curve, and drops a cassette, fumbling for it, and drifts across the corner into the path of an oncoming car. There is a big impact and it goes black.
Next thing, they show the guy wrapped up in bandages in hospital, and his wife tearfully hands him an envelope. She says "This came for you!", and he looks at a speeding camera fine. He starts crying and says "I'm sorry", and she angrily says "Tell that to his kids!".

Now, almost immediately, people pulled this advert to pieces and picked holes in the logic used. Mainly they were as follows:
* He got caught by the camera. And kept on driving instead of being physically stopped by a cop like "in the old days". This lets him keep on breaking the law.
* How much longer after the camera "caught" him did he have the accident...five minutes later? An Hour? Three hours? More importantly, would it have happened at all if he had been stopped immediately by a policeman instead of being allowed to keep on driving?
* He drifted across on a curve into the path of a car...even if both were doing the speed limit, that accident would have occurred with the exact same fatal results given an combined impact speed of just over 200kph...if I was in the other drivers seat a the time of an accident like that and saw a car drift across into my path only a few meters ahead, I'm sure my last thoughts before impact wouldn't be "Gee I hope he's only doing 100kph instead of 110...".
* How much longer after the accident did he recieve the fine? Certainly long enough for him to be recovering in hospital much later.
* How much of a ***** is his wife?
Just kidding...that last one was usually the top of the list of complaints about the ad...
People aren't stupid, and they can tell when they're being bullsh1tted to and treated like kids.

I'll go along with a laser or radar trap manned by a policeman who pulls you over and fines you as being related to "road safety"...as long as it isn't blatantly hidden on a long straight piece of road where there is no history of accidents, or at the bottom of a hill...yes yes yes...I know the guidelines say they musn't be set up at the bottom of hills, but everyone who's seen one there put your hands up...whoa whoa...slow down...I can't count them all...
If they are set up in known accident black spots, or areas where drifting over the limit can be proven to increase the danger, then fine.

However, hiding them in a bush and taking a photo that turns up weeks later, without stopping the illegal behavior right away and preventing the person just cruising off into the distance without slowing down, is NOT road safety or crash prevention. It's money raising.

As my nephew in the police force says, when you are in the back of the camera car and it goes off, you wonder a few things...why was he speeding? Is he drunk, drugged up, stolen or unregistered car, unroadworthy and dangerous, boot full of dope, just robbed a servo down the road, unlicenced driver...the list goes on, and if they STOPPED speeding drivers, like they used to before cameras, they would catch all these problems and nip any further danger to the public in the bud. "It's not poilce work, it's just collecting cash", in his words.

A famous Australian motoring journalist didn't call it "the great road safety lie" many years back for nothing...

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by sudszy

So we only have people obeying laws when they see police cars, how many miles of road and school crossings are in your country?

No, and I didn't say they did, I just said sometimes they showed their presence, but people seem to obey the signs regardless. Because they know it's about safety. How many miles of school crossing? Bloody hell, I don't know! What difference does that make?

Originally Posted by sudszy

Basically if we create an environment where people believe they could be detected anywhere then they will be more likely to comply more often, baffling logic I know.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read. You want to rule people by force? That is called dictatorship. If that's what you want, then you don't want freedom or democracy. Both can't co-exist. Even if your dictator's intentions are good, it is still dictatorship. Also, it wouldn't work because drivers would be more focussed on their speedo, and nothing else. Like the example I gave in the other speed camera thread of the Mercedes entering the City Link Tunnel.

Originally Posted by sudszy

"But humans we let on the road, most will have the mental powers to process that the speeding infringement was for something they did 2 weeks ago and that doing it again will result in more pain, it changes the long term behaviour of many people in 2 weeks that years of safe driving lectures couldnt!

It obviously isn't working is it? That's why people here obey the school zones, and Australians are getting fined.

Originally Posted by sudszy

But you dont have a problem that every piece of road in your country is not currently monitored by patrol cars or cameras to catch these killers?

Nope. As I said, most people drive sensibly, the only things I would change is reduce allowable BAC, and ban talking on the phone while driving (hand-held). Everything else works. "Catch these killers" A phrase based on emotion, not fact.
Sudszy, your real name isn't Steve Bracks is it? I wish I had a politician here who knew what's best for me, because obviously I have no clue. Oh I do, his name is Obama.

[DJR-351]

Maybe someone could start a thread where members can post up their favourite speed cam photo, I would......but i have never had one

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by chevypower

Nope. As I said, most people drive sensibly, the only things I would change is reduce allowable BAC, and ban talking on the phone while driving (hand-held). Everything else works. "Catch these killers" A phrase based on emotion, not fact.

I live in a small town where we don't even have a police station...the nearest Plod is 20km away in one direction, maybe 30 in the other. We have a school, we have plenty of kids walking around the streets, riding bikes (trail bikes and push bikes) through the streets...yet despite all this, what we don't have is everyone behaving like animals on the road just because we're "not being watched" by the police constantly. I know it's hard for those who believe "Every K Over Is A Killer", but even if not being watched 24 hours a day, people will, generally, do the right thing.

Most people do indeed drive sensibly. I can drive from here to Rockhampton, about 180km away, and not see a police car at all, apart from the odd one escorting a wide load, yet the Capricorn Highway isn't littered with the remains of wrecked cars and hordes of people doing 200kph.
The accidents we do have out here are not speed related...they're maybe 90% fatigue related. It's a big problem out here with miners and other shift workers who finish a 12 hour shift and try and drive a few hours back home when they get a long weekend off.

I am yet to see a speed camera that can detect a tired driver...and I'm far more concerned that the driver coming towards me could quite possibly be half asleep than the chance that he might be going 10kph over the speed limit...

I agree...hammer the real dangerous driving habits on the road...fatigue, bad drivers, drunk drivers, unroadworthy cars, people chatting merrily on thier phone...fine them and fine them hard.
However, as I said above, none of these things can be caught with a speed camera. In fact people doing any of those things are, quite usually, going slower than the average traffic flow as they are concentrating on something else besides actually driving the car effectively and safely.
Police openly say they use this behavior to home in on people like that...driving slower than the traffic, sticking carefully to the white line, weaving slightly...and this is why a visible and mobile police presence is needed instead of a fixed camera looking at one instant in time, and then only looking for one particular type of offence and ignoring completely the multitude other dangers going on at the same time.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

* He drifted across on a curve into the path of a car...even if both were doing the speed limit, that accident would have occurred with the exact same fatal results given an combined impact speed of just over 200kph...if I was in the other drivers seat a the time of an accident like that and saw a car drift across into my path only a few meters ahead, I'm sure my last thoughts before impact wouldn't be "Gee I hope he's only doing 100kph instead of 110...".

If he was doing 115km/h then the impact speed for him is 115km/h. You don't decelerate from 115-0km/h and then accelerate back up to 100km/h in the opposite direction when involved in a head on.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by irish2

If he was doing 115km/h then the impact speed for him is 115km/h. You don't decelerate from 115-0km/h and then accelerate back up to 100km/h in the opposite direction when involved in a head on.

If one vehicle is doing 100, and the other is doing 100 and they collide head on, the impact for each driver is pretty close to the impact as if they had been driving along on thier own doing 200kph and hitting something. Whatever the sum of the speeds is in a head-on, that's what each driver is faced with. I suppose "impact speed" is not the strictly correct term. Probably "impact energy" would be more accurate, as when you've stopped, there's no speed involved, but the thing that takes over at that point is kinetic energy and the stored potential energy of the mass of your vehicle travelling at whatever speed it was doing at impact.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

If one vehicle is doing 100, and the other is doing 100 and they collide head on, the impact for each driver is pretty close to the impact as if they had been driving along on thier own doing 200kph and hitting something. Whatever the sum of the speeds is in a head-on, that's what each driver is faced with. I suppose "impact speed" is not the strictly correct term. Probably "impact energy" would be more accurate, as when you've stopped, there's no speed involved, but the thing that takes over at that point is kinetic energy and the stored potential energy of the mass of your vehicle travelling at whatever speed it was doing at impact.

No, Irish2 is right in correcting your statement.
Two equal mass cars slamming into each other at 100km/h is basically the same collision as either vehicle hitting a fixed object at that speed, its been discussed many times on this forum, at best its justs basic high school physics. If you had a headon a1 100km/h on in a car with a 60 tonne truck, then for the car driver it would be near the equivalent of hitting a fixed object at 200km/h.

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

. Probably "impact energy" would be more accurate, as when you've stopped, there's no speed involved, but the thing that takes over at that point is kinetic energy and the stored potential energy of the mass of your vehicle travelling at whatever speed it was doing at impact.

You really have some fuzzy physics going on here:
If there is no speed, there is no kinetic energy to take over
stored potential energy? loaded spring in there?

[DanielXR8]

Originally Posted by eb2monty

Not this again.

My theory for speed cameras: Don't speed and you have nothing to worry about. And bringing up times where there have been errors is not a counter argument. If you feel that you have been wrongly fined, take it further. The chances of it occurring is minimal. I'd like to see the track record of previous fines received from those that whinge about them. What relevance does talking about low income families and volunteers have? I would have thought they can't afford to speed? Speeding is no harm to any human being? I suppose drinking and driving is ok too?

And if enough don't speed, keep dropping the speed limit until some do. Its not as simple as follow the law, if the law is being manipulated to make money at the cost of the public.

Thats how you get into the situation in Victoria where they are hunting you down for 1km over and making a large number of otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals. Victoria can't afford its citizens to follow the law. It counts on them breaking it and often. The state budget is built around it for crying out loud.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by DanielXR8

And if enough don't speed, keep dropping the speed limit until some do. Its not as simple as follow the law, if the law is being manipulated to make money at the cost of the public.

Thats how you get into the situation in Victoria where they are hunting you down for 1km over and making a large number of otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals. Victoria can't afford its citizens to follow the law. It counts on them breaking it and often. The state budget is built around it for crying out loud.

In Queensland they seem to see "dropping the speed limit" as the default way of "making a road safer"...
Near Bundaberg they dropped the limit on the roads to the beaches to 80kph after a couple of accidents. One was three drunk girls at 2am hitting a power pole after missing a corner, killing one of them, and the other was a woman who pulled out in front of traffic from a side road. Disregarding the drunks, the accident where the woman pulled out into traffic was investigated by the Transport Department (on request of the local council), and said the road was fine, visibility was fine, the speed limit was appropriate, and it was totally driver error. But the council, listening to an emotive campaign run by the womans family in the local paper ("Don't let our mummy die in vain!") the council ignored the Transport Departments recommendations and lowered the limit to 80kph.

When I went to Brisbane to see the Top Gear Live show, I was amazed at the looooong stretches of Highway One past Gympie which are 80 to 90kph, divided by a meter wide center line, signs saying "No Overtaking", and what must be tens of millions of dollars of massive overhead illuminated signs which dramatically tell you "YOU are tailgating: Back Off!"...even when there's nothing for a kilometer either way...
Once again, the "accidents" in this area were completely driver error...people overtaking in the pouring rain, people pulling out onto a main highway from a side road without looking, etc. Don't try and blame the drivers...just make them drive slower to make it safer for the large number of idiots out there who can't drive to save thier life to break the law and dpo stupid things...

"The Great Road Safety Lie" rolls on...

[Bud Bud]

Originally Posted by DanielXR8

And if enough don't speed, keep dropping the speed limit until some do.

Although I play the game, (only caught once doing 61 in a 50 in the last ten years or more these days), this is exactly what I am afraid of as well. I like the term hunted down for very 1 k over the limit, because that is exactly what is going on. If everybody obeyed all of the sign posted speed limits all of the time no matter how ridiculous some are set to then the Gov would have only two choices, accept less general revenue or lower speed limits more to begin the cycle all over again to regain said lost revenue. What other choice would they have?

Not only do we put up with a mish mash of ever changing speed limits over relative short distances now but half the time it is impossible with out local knowledge to know exactly what the given speed limit is anymore either. This is no accident but rather by design imho. If you pull out from a known 50kph street onto a 60kph, then you will need to continue at 50 until you come across the next 60 sign because that is how the law is written. The roads themselves do not seem to run a common theme or indicate what the speed limit is until you come up to the next sign post regardless wether there are houses around or even if the road has multiple lanes etc so you can not rely on common sense to make a decision.

This was really brought home to me when my son was learning to drive. He would ask what is the speed limit after turning onto a new road? and I would say I think we are now in a 60 and he would say think or know because I can't afford to gamble. Meanwhile cars would become irate at the L plate driver who was doing 50 in a 60 until the next 60 sign came into view. If with over 30 years driving experience I could not tell the difference then how could he, how does anyone? This could easily happen in reverse as well, in fact I think that the Gov banks on it!

Still I read other peoples response to pro anti speeding laws and pro speed camera use and I realise that we only have ourselves to blame for any Gov taking advantage of our apathy in this country.

Bud Bud

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Bud Bud

Gov would have only two choices, accept less general revenue or lower speed limits more to begin the cycle all over again to regain said lost revenue. What other choice would they have?

Governments can choose to raise revenue in what ever way they see fit. Obviously if one method of revenue falls they will set higher taxes in other areas, sales, property, fuel...or if they go to the feds screaming poor then our income tax can go up.

But you think the only alternative is to lower speed limits .....what happens when we get down to 1km/h?

At the end of the day govco needs money to fund the services that tax payers demand...education, health, defence etc, it has to come from somewhere.

At present Im quite happy having people that cant follow basic road rules subsidising the rest of us.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by sudszy

But you think the only alternative is to lower speed limits .....what happens when we get down to 1km/h?

That's the way it's going in Victoria. I remember when they first brought in 50km/h limits. I am not opposed to that, but I knew at the time, they would do 40, then 30.. etc It happened. Weren't they proposing 20km/h in the CBD? Are they trying to make sure that cars and turtles can share the roads safely? Or just looking for ways to raise the revenue after people get used to going at slower speeds?

[Bud Bud]

Originally Posted by sudszy

At present Im quite happy having people that cant follow basic road rules subsidising the rest of us.

Great, as I said I am not a contributor either. But your response is exactly the point I am making. At what point of dumbing down the average road user by continuously lowering speed limits in line with revenue raising will you arc up??? Could it be the magical 1kph as you suggest??? When they ban cars all together because they actually move perhaps, I don't know so you tell me. They maybe basic road rules by today's standards but they are also designed to confuse and trap everyday folk (not just hoons and the anti social) just going about their daily business.

I pity anybody that has not had the experience of 150kph (in a 1.4 T diesel mind you) on the autobahn in Germany while Audi's, Merc's and the like share the same road travelling over 200kph. I have driven through the Mohave Desert on some rickety roads that would come under enormous scrutiny in Australia at over 70 mph (and a little more in some places ), and all the while in this country we are continually faced with lower speed limits even in the middle of no where and rule these limits with an iron fist through the over use of revenue raising oops I mean safety speed cameras. But hey if you think that any Gov has the right to raise revenue any way it sees fit without questioning them like some of us are here, then that is your prerogative, that is your democratic right.

Bud Bud

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Bud Bud

I pity anybody that has not had the experience of 150kph (in a 1.4 T diesel mind you) on the autobahn in Germany while Audi's, Merc's and the like share the same road travelling over 200kph.

I pity anyone that has to travel on the autobahn daily and have to endure this absurd and dangerous german culture, yes I have lived there and experienced it first hand.

Originally Posted by Bud Bud

with lower speed limits even in the middle of no where and rule these limits with an iron fist through the over use of revenue raising oops I mean safety speed cameras. But hey if you think that any Gov has the right to raise revenue any way it sees fit without questioning them like some of us are here, then that is your prerogative, that is your democratic right.

Birthrights, democratic rights, rights to bear arms.....for goodness sakes? what a distortion of reality. You are free to drive anywhere any time in this country at what is a reasonable speed.

As for speed limits being reduced solely for the purpose of revenue raising? the basic limits for freeways and public highways and major suburban roads haven't changed in 40 years.

Where we have had major changes, suburban streets and school zones, there hasnt been a major push for speed detection, especially suburban streets, so where is your argument?

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I pity anyone that has to travel on the autobahn daily and have to endure this absurd and dangerous german culture, yes I have lived there and experienced it first hand.



Birthrights, democratic rights, rights to bear arms.....for goodness sakes? what a distortion of reality. You are free to drive anywhere any time in this country at what is a reasonable speed.

As for speed limits being reduced solely for the purpose of revenue raising? the basic limits for freeways and public highways and major suburban roads haven't changed in 40 years.

Where we have had major changes, suburban streets and school zones, there hasnt been a major push for speed detection, especially suburban streets, so where is your argument?

Normally when it comes to speeding and the logic behind it, I'm with you - but the bit that gets me is that basic limits for freeways and public highways and major suburban roads HAVE changed...they fix the roads, making the infrastructure better...and then drop the speed limit. They might not do it so frequently in Melbourne, but they sure as hell do it in Brisbane...and with regular monotony.

The concept of 'reasonable speed' is also contentious as one can argue that the speed limits on certain roads are not reasonable, in fact far from it.

The autobahn gets everyone's blood boiling...they're allowed to drive at high speeds - that's their laws, not ours. I have no problem with their laws - they get from A to B faster than we do...

As far as his comment on democratic rights, I think you may have misunderstood what he said...he said if you don't want to question the government, that's your right...

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I pity anyone that has to travel on the autobahn daily and have to endure this absurd and dangerous german culture, yes I have lived there and experienced it first hand.

You pity people who drive on roads where most people know what they are doing?

I'd prefer everyone know what they are doing instead of the typical road here where only half the drivers seam to know what's going on.

[XR8menace]

I work on Barrow Is off the coast of Karratha WA. A big new LNG plant being built. All vehicles are fitted with GPS and our driving monitored. Every time we go above the speed limit usually 40 or 60kph a warning buzzer go off.

Now I'm not perfect and have had a few speeding fines but I do consider myself a very aware driver on the road and have avoided a couple of accidents (from other drivers faults) because of that fact.

I find you spend so much time waching the speedo worrying about going over speed it definately takes your consentration away from whats in front of you.

I think if they spent more time on the roads booking people for tail gating, lane hopping, sitting in the right hand lane doing 95kph in a 100zone that would make a hell of alot more difference than a speed camera on a straight bit of road where their has NEVER been a fatality

Just my 2 bits.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by XR8menace

All vehicles are fitted with GPS and our driving monitored. Every time we go above the speed limit usually 40 or 60kph a warning buzzer go off.

My work has the same thing. But we only get a warning letter if we go over 110 sustained amount of time. Highest speed limit we travel on is 100km/h zone.

A guy at work was talking to a truck driver one night, truck driver said he just got a call from an office lady asking him why he was speeding. He was doing 103km/h at 3am.
That's just ridiculous having GPS watching peoples driving waiting for them to do a couple of kays over the limit. Something sudszy would support I guess.