Speed Cameras

[GT350H]

The reality of it all is; MOST OF US EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT, not always but we do..sometimes we get caught, other times we'll get away with it. Its about decisions..

For me, there are a number of factors that come into it: ability, machinery, conditions, third party, etc.
The difference is that you draw a line between what is safe and what is dangerous, again you make decisions.

Im not a fan of the Renenue Machines but IF ( and I repeat IF ) their presence saves lives, then that's good enough for me.
:[:_:[:(
 

[StephenSLR]

So glad i am in WA. ....  it might be a little more expensive to live in WA (in places up north, ALOT more expensive!) but its alot cheaper to drive!

Go on, tell us all what you pay for rego each year in W.A. Do you have to pay for a green slip there?

Scary thing is though - most speedo's are not accurate, and one person's 100kph is someone elses 110kph and someone elses' 55mph.

The car manufacturers speedos have an accuracy of 10% so they should not fine you if you are doing 65.9 km/hr.

There was a backlash about revenue raising with the hair dryers and cameras and one politician many years back came out saying they don't fine you unless you're doing over 76km/hr anyway.

There was such an uproar at him, asking - so what is the speed limit 60 or 76?  Due to this uproar they then of course had to make the speeding law more stringent for us.  :_

If you have a speedo in mph it doesn't matter, it is your responsibility to keep within the speed limit. If you complain your speedo isn't accurate they will be more than happy to slap a defect sticker on your car.

s

[Pedro]

mach70 quote ....
...........The issue should be about better Driver Training and better roads.
..........If the governments were serious about "saving" lives they would fix the roads and train new drivers better.



+ 1

[StephenSLR]

...........The issue should be about better Driver Training and better roads.

I think better discipline from drivers is the issue, if a road is bumpy, the curve is extra tight we all know we should travel slower on it.

How many of us actually do slow down to 35km/hr around a curve when we see the sign?

But I agree in some instances where a dual carriageway is needed to prevent those that fall asleep at the wheel from ploughing into oncoming traffic.

s

[mikes68]

The car manufacturers speedos have an accuracy of 10% so they should not fine you if you are doing 65.9 km/hr.

To be honest, I think everyone has heard this. I'm not going to dispute it but I have never seen anything that (IMO) absolutely confirms this nor am I really interested in doing so.

The variation is going to be consistent ie if your speedo is reading 60km/hr one day and the actual speed is 65, then the next day if your speedo is reading 60km/hr your actual speed will still be 65. Not 60, 55, 70 whatever. The one very insignificant difference could be due to temperature as this does affect the way components behave mechanically however that would be so small as to discount it.

If your speedo behaves contrary to the above statement then you have a defective instrument. I would stand by this even on the old speedos that we find in our classics.

So if you are aware that your speedo over / under reads then YOU are responsible for adjusting your driving to suit.

So then we can throw in the argument about the accuracy of the various detection devices in use... well, again these are, under normal circumstances going to be pretty darn close to the mark.

They do make allowances and that is why you don't (typically) get done for speeding 5k's over the limit.

I used to drive like there was no tomorrow at times, certainly, and when I got caught, I ACCEPTED that I was doing the wrong thing and paid the fine. I even had a suspension once for too many points. That was all my own doing and so be it.

I am happy to call the speed cameras revenue raisers as, once again I will say, they are a voluntary tax. If something is wrong with the gear or an officer has made a mistake then absolutely contest it but if you are doing all the right things, observing the law then you should be just fine. Where the revenue gets sent to, well that is up to our politicians and guess what...? We, the voting populatoin put them in office.

Just my humble opinion...

[StephenSLR]

The variation is going to be consistent ie if your speedo is reading 60km/hr one day and the actual speed is 65, then the next day if your speedo is reading 60km/hr your actual speed will still be 65.

Yes you are correct, it will be precise but not accurate.

For those that don't know the difference.



Also, things like wheel/tyre diameter, diff ratio's, etc. can alter your speedo readings if you change them.

s

[non member]

Also, things like wheel/tyre diameter, diff ratio's, etc. can alter your speedo readings if you change them.

s

So would be a new "correct sized" tyre VS a "correct size" tyre almost worn down to the tread indicators.

[StephenSLR]

So would be a new "correct sized" tyre VS a "correct size" tyre almost worn down to the tread indicators.

I'm sure there would be a difference but minimal, you could even argue tyre pressures and I'm sure your speedo isn't that accurate.

How about the height of the driver and parallax error of the needle reading?

s

[Foresight]

Tell that to the relatives of all the dead people killed on their sub-standard roads.

What about the lives that were saved by subsidised health care, subsidised education, subsidised industries, welfare, etc? Yes, it is a terrible thing that lives are lost on the roads and there should be something done to prevent it but the government has priorities. If the government thinks $1 spent in health care saves 3 lives and $1 spent on roads saves 1 life it is obvious where they will spend their money. I’m sure there would be a lot more fatalities if there were third world hospitals that crash victims were taken too.

If better roads are what we want, then why don’t we pay for them privately?
Ok then how about we pay for them through the revenue of road taxes and speed cameras?

The answer to both those questions is that regardless of the situation, no one wants to cough up their hard earned money.
At the end of the day everything costs money. People are happy to sit and complain about the problems but they aren’t willing to contribute the money that is needed to fix them.

If people really cared about saving lives then they would accept that sometimes there are situations where it might be unfair.
I’m sure that I’d rather receive an undeserved speeding ticket in the mail (which can be contested) than a knock on the door from a police officer to inform me of a loved one’s death caused by someone speeding.

[Bumblebee]

Sadly, it's this logic that will drive the mining tax!

[Foresight]

I'm curious bee
Why will my logic dive the mining tax?

[StephenSLR]

Sadly, it's this logic that will drive the mining tax!

The tax is only for when there is big profits and the logic is to put a bit of those big profits back into this country.

Foreign companies are mining Aus.

e.g. The Sino Iron project - for those that know Latin Sino means China.  

Citigroup who are running the project are a Chinese company that have a large stake in other Chinese companies such as Cathay Pacific, etc.

s

[Foresight]

Yep I get the mining tax stephenslr but I just wasn't sure how bee made the connection between my logic on speed cameras and the mining tax?

[StephenSLR]

British motorists are so incensed with the blatant revenue raising that they are taking matters into their own hands.

Our ones are under surveillance - we have cameras filming the cameras.

s

[usa289]

The reality of it all is; MOST OF US EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT, not always but we do..sometimes we get caught, other times we'll get away with it. Its about decisions..

For me, there are a number of factors that come into it: ability, machinery, conditions, third party, etc.
The difference is that you draw a line between what is safe and what is dangerous, again you make decisions.

Im not a fan of the Renenue Machines but IF ( and I repeat IF ) their presence saves lives, then that's good enough for me.
:[:_:[:(
 

GT350H

I totally :i  

What I get peeved off with is when the cameras are placed in positions where it is clear there is/has been no record of any hazardous situation affecting injury to anyone.... sure, have the cameras located in "hot spots" or known accident areas ... but not on streets where they clock everbody for doing 54kmh in a 50kmh zone .... purely revenue raising!

[moe]

The car manufacturers speedos have an accuracy of 10% so they should not fine you if you are doing 65.9 km/hr.

But that is where it get confusing - the 10% could be either way. I have to adjust my driving with my cars - My ute is at 100% accuracy thanks to me doing some tyre swapping.  My wife's car is out by 10%; in that if it is an 80 zone, I need to do 88kph if I want to do the speed limit.  The dealer claims her car is "within tolerences" and "you will be unlikely to get a ticket" and it was due to the speed cameras that they make them like that.  
My view is that she is more likely to be the subject of road rage by overtaking a slower vehicle on a dual lane road as she would be holding up those legitimately wanting to do the speed limit as she trusts her speedo.

[Foresight]

They won't clock you for 55 in a 50 zone since that is within the % allowance that we have already discussed in depth.

By putting cameras everywhere (including quiet streets) they are making motorists slow down everywhere which will save lives. By placing them in unusual spots they are putting the idea in the back of drivers minds that they could get nabbed anywhere, anytime. In the graham farmer tunnel I constantly see people going 20-30km over the speed limit because they know there is no speed cameras in there.

If people paid attention to the speed limits and any changes to the limits like reduced speeds for road works then there wouldn't be any revenue raising "traps".

Since everyone is so concerned about forking out cash for the governments "revenue raising" then don't speed. It is that simple.
When there is no speeding then there is no money exchanging hands.

[moe]

Since everyone is so concerned about forking out cash for the governments "revenue raising" then don't speed. It is that simple.
When there is no speeding then there is no money exchanging hands.

Catch a bus or get Foresight to drive!  Easy solution....

[non member]

Citigroup who are running the project are a Chinese company that have a large stake in other Chinese companies such as Cathay Pacific, etc.

s

StephenSLR

Just wondering where you get your info from,

Citigroup is an American company I believe. Wikipedia is not the best source of info or totally reliable, but has plenty on the company here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citigroup

Cathay are still Hong Kong based & registered, I know now part of China, but it is basically the same company started by an American & Australian pilots.

Wikipedia again as it an easy read..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathay_Pacific

Easy to find out more by the use of Google.

The worlds companies are a mixed up place, do you know what percentage of "our" mining companies are still owned by "us"?

Not even going to start on politics here as it is not the place.

To finish the conversation about speed cameras...

DON'T SPEED This has worked for me for many years, so worth trying.

[tim_morrison82]

StephenSLR - rego costs

Annual Rego for a AU falcon stationwagon $488. third party insurance (NSW greenslip) is included with registration. there is NO annual inspection (NSW pinkslip). This year they are also scrapping rego stickers!

fuel i thought was a little cheaper when i first arrived, but seems to be on par now.

RAC (NSW NRMA) has 2 types of cover. 1 covers a specific car only($130), and the other covers a specific driver no matter what car they drive($190).

and No Toll roads! There, i think thats about it... not sure what the mustang will cost. its a bit far away yet...

[rattusrex]

Tell that to the relatives of all the dead people killed on their sub-standard roads.

What about the lives that were saved by subsidised health care, subsidised education, subsidised industries, welfare, etc? Yes, it is a terrible thing that lives are lost on the roads and there should be something done to prevent it but the government has priorities. If the government thinks $1 spent in health care saves 3 lives and $1 spent on roads saves 1 life it is obvious where they will spend their money. I’m sure there would be a lot more fatalities if there were third world hospitals that crash victims were taken too.
If better roads are what we want, then why don’t we pay for them privately?
Ok then how about we pay for them through the revenue of road taxes and speed cameras?

The answer to both those questions is that regardless of the situation, no one wants to cough up their hard earned money.
At the end of the day everything costs money. People are happy to sit and complain about the problems but they aren’t willing to contribute the money that is needed to fix them.

If people really cared about saving lives then they would accept that sometimes there are situations where it might be unfair.
I’m sure that I’d rather receive an undeserved speeding ticket in the mail (which can be contested) than a knock on the door from a police officer to inform me of a loved one’s death caused by someone speeding.
[/rquote Bee, there are none so blind as them that cannot see. Just ignore. Eddie

[mach70]

Here is some interesting reading from the ABS



http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/2f762f95845417aeca25706c00834efa/45D87006541A9B6FCA2573D20010BEF4?opendocument

[Foresight]

Bee, there are none so blind as them that cannot see. Just ignore. Eddie

Ignorance is bliss...isn't it?

[rattusrex]

Bee, there are none so blind as them that cannot see. Just ignore. Eddie

Ignorance is bliss...isn't it?

Or dumb. Public servant?

[non member]

Bee, there are none so blind as them that cannot see. Just ignore. Eddie

Ignorance is bliss...isn't it?

Or dumb. Public servant?

Lee is self employed Eddie.