new speed camera rules in Vic

[Aussie]

new Speed Camera Rules | Herald Sun (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/victoria-police-adjusts-mobile-speed-camera-rules-to-allow-cameras-to-be-concealed/story-fni0fee2-1226739895665?link=news.com)

Seems they are getting new rules to allow them to hide the cameras, plus putting them on hills

[Homestar]

Still pretty safe driving the 101...:). Still easy to avoid a fine - don't speed.

[BigJon]

I found my best way of avoiding the Vic speed cameras was to move States to SA. The speed camera thing was only one of the long list of benefits :p.

[mikehzz]

I've always thought them draconian in Vic but the numbers don't lie...

Road Safety - Australian Automobile Association (http://www.aaa.asn.au/issues/road_safety.htm)

The figures for NT are relevant to the 130kph speed limit on single lane roads argument.

[vnx205]

I know it is only one small sample of the roads in each state, but i am astonished that there is such a small difference between NSW and Victoria.

I have driven to Melbourne a couple of times around the coast down the Princes Highway. Most of the NSW section is one lane each way and some of it pretty hilly and windy. Most of the Victorian section is two lanes each way, divided road and quite flat.

How do the Victorians manage to kill themselves on such roads? :p

[Redback]

I know it is only one small sample of the roads in each state, but i am astonished that there is such a small difference between NSW and Victoria.

I have driven to Melbourne a couple of times around the coast down the Princes Highway. Most of the NSW section is one lane each way and some of it pretty hilly and windy. Most of the Victorian section is two lanes each way, divided road and quite flat.

How do the Victorians manage to kill themselves on such roads? :p


Probably because most speeders speed in all the wrong places, as an excample, there is a 60kph zone in Heathcote on the Princes Hwy through the shopping centre, it then turns to 100kph just out of it, I sit on 60 through there and am constantly being overtaken by car after car, once in the 100 zone, I re-pass all these cars, it's the same in all the low speed areas, the halfwits can do 70 or 80 in a 60 zone, but can't sit on 100 or close to it in a 100 zone.

AND

Most drivers drive above their ability, and can only speed in a straight line, all I can say is, if I was driving a car and a 4WD fully loaded towing a camper trailer overtook me going around a bend on a dual carrageway, I'd through my licence away;)

Baz.

Baz.

[rb30gtr]

Great, getting a fine doing 53 down a hill in a 50 zone. Now THAT will save millions of lives.

[Barra1]

I've always thought them draconian in Vic but the numbers don't lie...

Road Safety - Australian Automobile Association (http://www.aaa.asn.au/issues/road_safety.htm)

The figures for NT are relevant to the 130kph speed limit on single lane roads argument.

The NT figures are very disproportionate and I wonder if the reason is deeper than the 130kph/single lane argument.

Is it too sensitive to consider it a possibility that the cause is due to members of some communities driving with several people in the back of a ute, no seat belts in the front and basically some very "dodgy" vehicles. Coupled with dubious, if any, driver training, my suggestion becomes a distinct possibility.

If this is the case, we (the general community) certainly have a lot of work to do in regard to education and training. Likewise, if, indeed, it is the case, the job needs to be done and done now.

I must add my "suggestion" is not intended to offend anyone nor am I having a "go" at any section of the community. In fact, I am concerned that I may be correct and more concerned that if I am, the job to correct it may be too "hot" or hard for the relevant authorities to handle.

[Pickles2]

Absolute BULL****.
This is simply revenue raising, rather, "more" revenue raising.
So, they say this is for the safety of the camera operator, well ok, if that is the case, then place a sign on the side of the road, stating a camera is there.....will they do that?....Yeah Right. (Some States/Countries do)
Why do the Public put up with this ABSOLUTE NONSENSE,...so now, going down a hill, with your foot off the accelerator, how many are going to be booked at 64 in a 60 zone?....This is purely & simply Revenue Raising, & even more annoying to me, it's being introduced by a Liberal Govt, who I thought, before they were elected, would be above this sort of stuff...How wrong was I?
Disgusted, Pickles.

[Fatso]

The more Speed cameras the better , i for one am sick and tide of speeding drivers , i stick to the speed limits and on a never ending bassis have speeders tailgating ("AT THE SPEED LIMIT") trying to intimidate into getting out of there way, espeacialy trucks ( so much for speed limitors on trucks ) , and if that does not work they try and overtake in an inapropriate section of road putting them stuped selves other drivers at risk .
We have a real problem with driver attitude in this country and for the safety of the majority of the good drivers these dicks need to be taken off the road by any means possible :nazilock: , Retrained and given a labotamy if required .

[disco 3 door]

It's NOT revenue raising. Thats why the Vic. Gov. Is now back in the black as the news last night stated from the increase in FINES.

Sent from my GT-N8020 using AULRO mobile app

[Barra1]

Poor old me... poor old me... I copped a fine for breaking the law:mad:

Double speeding fines, no even better, triple ALL fines:p

The government has to, and WILL, get funds from somewhere. If taxes are increased you have no choice but you do have a choice whether you wear a speeding fine.

Simple really. Don't break the law.;)

[Treads]

Gotta love the Herald - 4 out of the 5 pictures on that 'news' story show police members performing laser speed checks, not mobile speed camera cars. ****ing retards.....

[101RRS]

Still easy to avoid a fine - don't speed.

Unfortunately real life experiences with these things show that you don't have to be speeding to get a fine.

[ecn226]

Unfortunately real life experiences with these things show that you don't have to be speeding to get a fine.

I feel your pain Gary.

IMHO its nothing more than a revinue raising exersize. Sure we can all not speed and avoid the camera fines but whats stopping the tosser who just got his photo taken from continuing to speed afterwards and take out your wife and kids. Its not law enforcment unless they are pulled up chatted to and given a fine on the spot.

[dfendr]

Pinched from another Forum
Some ideas:

on the border of NSW and Vic
"warning, you are entering the nanny state - as long as you are doing exactly the speedlimit, you can do make up and play with your phone all you want because cameras cant see that"

or next to a wipe off 5 add in vic
"US department of transport study No. FHWA-RD-92-084 found :
*accidents at sites where speed limits were lowered increased by 5.4 precent
*accidents at sites where speed limits were raised decreased by 6.7 percent."

in 2011-12 NSW raised $89 million from Speed cameras.
In 2011-12 Victoria raised $250 million dollars from speed cameras

Speeding is the cause of less than 7% of accidents but represents 86% of traffic fines

its is statisticaly more dangerous to drive 10% below the speed limit that 10% over the limit (quote stats)

[Pickles2]

dfendr:...Thank You, at least we have some FACTS here.
A prior poster mentioned "attitude"...SPOT ON.
I've been driving for over 50 yrs, love my cars, love my V8s, love U.S. Muscle Cars & love my V8 Supercars, and I used to LOVE my driving, but not any more.
Attitude, that is the real issue, not speeding. Sure, I like plenty of power under my right foot, but simply because the speed limit is 100kph, does not mean I want to travel at that speed all the time, I might want to travel at 80KPH (not on a freeway), on a Country Road, up in the Mallee etc, plenty of stuff to see up there, so I might be doing 80ks. So, what do I do if someone comes up behind me?...Well, I MOVE OVER, let the guy go. but how many do that for me?....NOT MANY.
I was going down the Ocean Rd a few years ago in our GTO, speed limit 80ks, traffic doing 35/40ks,....WHY?....a ratbag in a BRAND NEW LANDCRUISER holding up around 15 cars, took me around 3 or 4 gos to get to him, gave him the finger when I finally got past him...didn't even see me,.....too busy eating something & talking to his passengers. If I'd have seen him at my next stop, he would've copped an earful.
So yeah, if someone wants to pass me, I Let 'em. But, NO-ONE is going to tell me that I should not be allowed to do more than 100ks in the Bush if I want to, if the conditions are safe. But just so ya get the meaasge,...I DO NOT (go over 100ks).
For goodness sake, in the late sixties, families were travelling to Qld (from Vic) on their holidays, & they'd be sitting on 70MPH, perhaps going to 80 to overtake?.....Geez, if ya did that now ya'd be arrested.
Like I said, if this latest "stunt" is simply about safety of the camera operator, then sure, take the camera off the road, BUT PUT A SIGN UP. Will they?...Yeah right.
Cheers, Pickles.

[vnx205]

If I may return briefly to those NT fatality figures; while I have no doubt that the NT is worse than the states and ACT, I wonder if it is fair to quote deaths per 100,000 population.

Could it be that the NT figures are made to look a little worse than they really are because more people in the NT need to use vehicles to travel because the public transport options that exist in other places aren't available?

Could it also be that NT drivers routinely need to undertake longer journeys than drivers in other places, so they are exposed to the risk of an accident for much longer?

Would a comparison of the number of deaths per 100,000 kms make the NT look a bit better than the number of deaths per 100,000 population?

[Eevo]

anyone who cant see this as revenue raising should lose their licence.

[101RRS]

Just announced on ABC TV - the NT is planning to reintroduce unlimited speed zones on the Stuart Highway. The first is to be a 200km section north of Alice Springs as a trial and if successful further sections.

When the NT had unlimited speed zones over 7 years ago a report that I read said that few fatal accidents on the Stuart were cause by high speed but animal strikes, locals sleeping on the road and getting run over and overloaded utes with unrestrained locals in the back rolling over.

Looks like common sense might be catching.

[BathurstTom]

If I may return briefly to those NT fatality figures; while I have no doubt that the NT is worse than the states and ACT, I wonder if it is fair to quote deaths per 100,000 population.

Could it be that the NT figures are made to look a little worse than they really are because more people in the NT need to use vehicles to travel because the public transport options that exist in other places aren't available?

Could it also be that NT drivers routinely need to undertake longer journeys than drivers in other places, so they are exposed to the risk of an accident for much longer?

Would a comparison of the number of deaths per 100,000 kms make the NT look a bit better than the number of deaths per 100,000 population?


It can also reflect the condition of the roads, the condition of the cars or the condition of the driver training to name a few environmental factors. As somebody else has said, speeding accounts for less than 10% of accidents. Stupidity on the other hand...

I am an ex professional driver - 4wd and heavy freight and I have seen a lot more stupid drivers get into trouble than speeding drivers.


Tom.

[strangy]

The NT figures are very disproportionate and I wonder if the reason is deeper than the 130kph/single lane argument. Is it too sensitive to consider it a possibility that the cause is due to members of some communities driving with several people in the back of a ute, no seat belts in the front and basically some very "dodgy" vehicles. Coupled with dubious, if any, driver training, my suggestion becomes a distinct possibility. If this is the case, we (the general community) certainly have a lot of work to do in regard to education and training. Likewise, if, indeed, it is the case, the job needs to be done and done now. I must add my "suggestion" is not intended to offend anyone nor am I having a "go" at any section of the community. In fact, I am concerned that I may be correct and more concerned that if I am, the job to correct it may be too "hot" or hard for the relevant authorities to handle.

Your comments are accurate and only the extraordinarily ignorant would be offended.

Alcohol + overloaded/crowded, unrestrained occupants are the majority representation in the NT.
"Speed" as the masses understand it and the media promotes, is irrelevant as a crash at anything above 60 has proven fatal for the most part and I have attended plenty of fatalities involving less speed for the same above circumstances.

If you took a draconian approach with limiters etc, the idiots unrestrained and drinking would still kill themselves.

Tourist fatalities in these parts in most cases also involve not wearing seatbelts. I quote from one man who just lost his wife and sister in law.." They were enjoying the freedom of the outback and didn't like the restriction of the seatbelt"
Both died in an 80km rollover ejected that the others survived without a scratch.

[sheerluck]

Tom, the difference is that stupidity isn't a crime. Just think of how full the jails would be if it were.

[Mick_Marsh]

Pinched from another Forum
Some ideas:

on the border of NSW and Vic
"warning, you are entering the nanny state - as long as you are doing exactly the speedlimit, you can do make up and play with your phone all you want because cameras cant see that"

or next to a wipe off 5 add in vic
"US department of transport study No. FHWA-RD-92-084 found :
*accidents at sites where speed limits were lowered increased by 5.4 precent
*accidents at sites where speed limits were raised decreased by 6.7 percent."

in 2011-12 NSW raised $89 million from Speed cameras.
In 2011-12 Victoria raised $250 million dollars from speed cameras

Speeding is the cause of less than 7% of accidents but represents 86% of traffic fines

its is statisticaly more dangerous to drive 10% below the speed limit that 10% over the limit (quote stats)
Where were these statistics published?

[dfendr]

What ruin a good story with facts

Try here



Effects Of Raising And Lowering Speed limits (http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html)

[POD]

I've noticed several times that the reporting of road fatality statistics seems always to be tied directly to legislation and law enforcement (such as speed limits, cameras etc) whilst vehicle design always gets a secondary mention, but the advancements in medical trauma care are never cited as a factor. Victoria introduced a Sate Trauma System in 2001 which has increased survival rates for major trauma patients, i.e. people are now surviving injuries that would have proved fatal 20 years ago. This is obviously a completely separate contribution to the road-toll reduction from that made by speed limits, cameras and the like, as those things seek to reduce crashes, whilst we are talking about people who have already had a crash. This seems to me to be an obvious factor in the high N.T. death statistics, as advanced medical care is not available in a timely manner to those in remote areas.

[PeterM]

I've always thought them draconian in Vic but the numbers don't lie...

Road Safety - Australian Automobile Association (http://www.aaa.asn.au/issues/road_safety.htm)

The figures for NT are relevant to the 130kph speed limit on single lane roads argument.

Ahhh no. If you actually look into the figures for the NT you will find the drink driving and fatigue are the major influences on road deaths there.

[PeterM]

The more Speed cameras the better , i for one am sick and tide of speeding drivers , i stick to the speed limits and on a never ending bassis have speeders tailgating ("AT THE SPEED LIMIT") trying to intimidate into getting out of there way, espeacialy trucks ( so much for speed limitors on trucks ) , and if that does not work they try and overtake in an inapropriate section of road putting them stuped selves other drivers at risk .
We have a real problem with driver attitude in this country and for the safety of the majority of the good drivers these dicks need to be taken off the road by any means possible :nazilock: , Retrained and given a labotamy if required .

And attitudes such as yours here are right up there with the poor attitude of drivers. No one appoints anyone as the guardian of what is perceived to be safe. I'm tipping that you've never driven trucks or had you speedo checked for accuracy. Every heavy truck that I have ever driven (of which there have been many) with a speed limiter was accurate up to 103km/h, never more.

If you're travelling slower than others, move over and give them an opportunity to continue on their way. Do their choices effect you? Does it make one shred of difference to your day?

Here's a newsflash for you as well. Speed cameras do not save lives. All they do is change the relative injures in the collisions that will still occur. That even flies in the face of basic common sense. What's the best way to not burn your hand on a hot stove? Don't touch the thing in the first place. The road safety-crats would have you believe that wearing an oven mitt all the time is the solution.

[PeterM]

I've noticed several times that the reporting of road fatality statistics seems always to be tied directly to legislation and law enforcement (such as speed limits, cameras etc) whilst vehicle design always gets a secondary mention, but the advancements in medical trauma care are never cited as a factor. Victoria introduced a Sate Trauma System in 2001 which has increased survival rates for major trauma patients, i.e. people are now surviving injuries that would have proved fatal 20 years ago. This is obviously a completely separate contribution to the road-toll reduction from that made by speed limits, cameras and the like, as those things seek to reduce crashes, whilst we are talking about people who have already had a crash. This seems to me to be an obvious factor in the high N.T. death statistics, as advanced medical care is not available in a timely manner to those in remote areas.

All good points but for the section I've put in bold. Those things are not in place to prevent crashes but to limit the energy in an impact. The road safety people are single-minded in their focus on slower impact = less energy = less death. The idea of actually preventing crashes is rather foreign.

[rb30gtr]

Poor old me... poor old me... I copped a fine for breaking the law:mad:

Double speeding fines, no even better, triple ALL fines:p

The government has to, and WILL, get funds from somewhere. If taxes are increased you have no choice but you do have a choice whether you wear a speeding fine.

Simple really. Don't break the law.;)

Can you point to me on a Series 1 dash with 1 million kms on the clock the difference between 50 and 53? And if you can't identify the difference you shall be fined immediately on the spot for endangering lives.:nazilock:

And don't say you would just drive at 45 to be sure. Well you will cause someone to go 55 to get past! And 55 in a 50 zone would surely be life in prison in VIC.