Thread: "Demerit" Points.

The country is asphyxiating in a blizzard of crack cocaine and our Fearless Leaders are standing on the faces of the average punter for this kind of crapola.
If they put it 10% of the effort into really fighting the drug lords, as they do on this speed fiction, drugs would be off the street inside a month.

A mate of mine got pinged in Sydney's northern beaches on a "student free day". It was the beginning of school holidays, his kids were at home, he forgot about the student free day. He got done outside Narrabeen public school 60/40 and then again at Narrabeen high school 70/40. Problem was that as well as being a student free day, it was also the friday of a long weekend, which meant double demerits. He lost 12 points that day and only hung on to his license by the skin of his teeth.

I haven't read ALL the comments but having been in court for six 'offences' over the last three years I feel 'qualified' to reply...

Firstly; speed cameras/fines are NOT and have NEVER been about 'road safety'. During my most recent court case I submitted to the court a study carried out in Australia demonstrating that speed cameras and a strict enforcement regime is more likely to CAUSE accidents than prevent them.

I even asked the cop on the stand whether he thought it was safe to constantly take your eyes OFF the road to regularly check your speed. He agreed it was an unsafe practice.

All the studies demonstrate that the only accidents where speed was a contributing factor were cases of EXCESSIVE speed, NEVER 5, 10, or even 15% over the posted limit, for which we are fined and revenue generated for the beurocraps.

In Europe they trialled an experiment where they removed ALL speed limits. Guess what? Accidents DECREASED and people actually drove SLOWER and to the conditions instead of the posted 'suggested' speed limit.

Secondly; All speed cameras used in this country are ILLEGAL under commonwealth Law because EVERY device used to measure things for trade, commerce or legal matters MUST have an individual pattern approval number stamped on or permanently fixed to the measuring device under the National Measurements Act 1960. Commonwealth Law over-rides State Law. NO speed camera or radar has one because they are nto considered accurate enough by the National Measurements Institute (the body who grants pattern approval numbers).

Thirdly; In Qld the Transport Operations Road Use Management (TORUM) Act is an illegal act that cannot be enforced in any court of law for one simple reason... There is NO proclamation in existence for the Act as required under the rules of Parliament.
In Qld they even went so far as to remove section 2 of the amended act, the Commencement. ALL acts MUST have a section 2, which is always titled the Commencement, saying this act will commence when it is proclaimed to be an actual enforceable Act by the Queen (or the GG).
Most states are in the same boat regarding this.

A judge I had once was VERY interested when I showed her the original 1995 TORUM Act and compared it to the amended 2001 TORUM Act with section 2 removed.
(She ended up looking for and eventually finding any excuse other than that to dismiss the case... "out you go Mr Wildwood, before you break something...")



In saying all that, no matter how much 'Law' you have behind you, no matter how many precedents from the High Court to the Supreme Court you submit, it ALWAYS comes down to how much honour/integrity the magistrate has.

In my 6 cases, twice I was assigned a 'special' magistrate in a 'special' court with no witnesses.
In both of these matters the Magistrate openly practiced law from the bench (illegal) and openly went against the very principles of fairness and law... one discussed with the police prosecutor IN COURT how "to get out of this one" (he had been specially brought down from Brisbane to 'deal with me'), and the other told me to my face that 1, I was guilty until I proved myself innocent!, ... and 2, I had to prove to the court that a proclamation for the Act did NOT exist, not the police prove that it did! ...as anyone versed in even the basics of law knows, it is impossible to prove a negative.

In one other case (Beaudesert) the Mag also practiced law from the bench, colluded IN COURT with the plaintiff (police) and refused to accept my evidence proving the camera was incorrectly set up (on a downgrade and with a large reflective sign directly behind my vehicle)... both causes for instant dismissal of the accuracy of the device as stated in the actual Operator's Manual for the device.

For the remaining three matters I was lucky enough to get a judge with a shred of honour and won them all. Yet, despite winning the matters, in each case the judge refused to grant me any recompense for my time. Even though the police lost, they got paid to be there while I did not!

To sum up: The courts are a sheering shed, to enter them is a roll of the dice. And speed cameras are a massive cash cow, generating literally hundreds of millions each year for each state. The vast majority simply 'pay up', because the option is to go to court and even if you win you lose. Despite winning three cases, I lost... all the time, research, preparation, study and multiple 'appearances' only to be adjourned while the Police Prostitutor tried to find a way around my arguments... gone, with no financial recompense as required under common law...

It is theft, plain and simple, and like all theft creates societal problems...
... If some poor sod loses their license for drifting a couple of Ks over the 'limit' too many times, the system doesn't care if he loses his job, his marriage, his kids grow up fatherless and turn to drugs and crime, none of it matters, only that the $$$ keep rolling in from the sheep.

Originally Posted by Pickles2

.... so she's copped THREE points for being 12ks over, 52 in a 40 zone (why it's a 40 zone, divided road etc,..I don't know!,,she has been in the process of slowing down, but obviously, not quickly enough.
....

For those that don't know the area:
It's downhill, it's within about 100m from two major fast food outlets, a hotel, a dangerous intersection controlled by lights! .. and a major school .. and you don't know why it's a 40km/h zone?

It seems you know the area quite well, and yet the driver of the vehicle still didn't have the presence of mind to slow down before getting into this zone as opposed to slamming on the brakes at the signpost!

While I avoid that area like the plague now, many years back in my previous job as a regular user of this area, I've seen far too many 'idiot accidents' at this intersection where people are either inattentive or reckless in trying to beat the traffic lights .. or both!

With all due respect to yourself and your wife, I'd say it's not only a fair cop, but an appropriate one as well.
The issue here is attentiveness, alertness and being aware of what One is doing whilst driving.
Your infringement was almost definitely due to the fixed speed camera at the lights, and not due to a hidden camera car, or police activity, so any argument that police presence in this situation is inappropriate. The camera is clearly visible and should have been the deterrent

ps. in the last 25 odd years, I've only had two speeding fines which were at 1km/h over the limit both on the same day due to the new oversized tyres I'd just got on my (then) Rodeo ute. I calculated the under reading of the speedo incorrectly, pre GPS days.

Is it a lot to ask of drivers to be aware of what they're doing whilst they're driving?

Originally Posted by Classic88

In the UK the police have a 10% + 2 rule of thumb e.g. if a driver isn't driving dangerously under the conditions they won't be penalised for travelling up to 46mph in a 40mph zone, 57mph in a 5-mph zone etc. This is due to the wildly implausible theory that it might be better for people to be watching the road around them rather than have their eyes fearfully glued to the speedometer. The exception is motorways where despite the 70mph limit, the de facto accepted speed is around 85mph.

Of course, I don't get demerit points since I still have my UK driving licence.

When I was cruising around the UK in '96 I noticed two or three police standing on an M1 overpass. When I stopped up the road a bit I asked the publican what the go was with police. Apparently, from that particular bridge, they had a good view down the highway both ways and could see "Reckless" behavior. He said that up the road a bit there would have been a police car on a ramp waiting for a call from the bridge boys. I didn't see the car though. The ramps were purpose built for acceleration I think. Maybe wrong there though.

Mine host told me the same thing with the speed limit. Drive sensibly to the conditions and away you go. It made me understand why I was always getting overtaken at my 70 mph

Sat on 80-90 the rest of my time after that and never had any issues with police or other drivers.

Originally Posted by AK83

For those that don't know the area:
It's downhill, it's within about 100m from two major fast food outlets, a hotel, a dangerous intersection controlled by lights! .. and a major school .. and you don't know why it's a 40km/h zone?

It seems you know the area quite well, and yet the driver of the vehicle still didn't have the presence of mind to slow down before getting into this zone as opposed to slamming on the brakes at the signpost!

While I avoid that area like the plague now, many years back in my previous job as a regular user of this area, I've seen far too many 'idiot accidents' at this intersection where people are either inattentive or reckless in trying to beat the traffic lights .. or both!

With all due respect to yourself and your wife, I'd say it's not only a fair cop, but an appropriate one as well.
The issue here is attentiveness, alertness and being aware of what One is doing whilst driving.
Your infringement was almost definitely due to the fixed speed camera at the lights, and not due to a hidden camera car, or police activity, so any argument that police presence in this situation is inappropriate. The camera is clearly visible and should have been the deterrent

ps. in the last 25 odd years, I've only had two speeding fines which were at 1km/h over the limit both on the same day due to the new oversized tyres I'd just got on my (then) Rodeo ute. I calculated the under reading of the speedo incorrectly, pre GPS days.

Is it a lot to ask of drivers to be aware of what they're doing whilst they're driving?

You are entitled to your opinion,....as I am entitled to mine.
Like I said, we do know the area, we didn't deny that we did "the crime"...and that we will "do the time",...well of course we will, because we've paid the fine.
Couldn't care less whether it's close to fast food outlets, hotels etc etc, or where or what sort of camera was there. My wife and I ALWAYS drive safely in terms of conditions....simply because we were flashed by a camera does not prove otherwise. I've already said we knew it was a 40 zone! There are also many reasons why that camera is one of the highest grossing cameras in Melbourne, and if you choose to ignore those reasons, well of course, that's fine too! There has been mention in this thread of others who are familiar with the location of this particular camera who have issues with it.
I maintain that in this particular case, whilst we are not unduly concerned by it, the "legal" consequences of what I call a very minor infringement could far outweigh the crime in some circumstances.
But of course, in terms of your post "the issue here is attentiveness, alertness and being aware of what one is doing whilst driving". I do get that, I guess it's unfortunate that we can't all be perfect, all of the time.
Pickles.

Originally Posted by Pickles2

I guess it's unfortunate that we can't all be perfect, all of the time.
Pickles.

I can.

Originally Posted by Saitch

When I was cruising around the UK in '96 I noticed two or three police standing on an M1 overpass. When I stopped up the road a bit I asked the publican what the go was with police. Apparently, from that particular bridge, they had a good view down the highway both ways and could see "Reckless" behavior. He said that up the road a bit there would have been a police car on a ramp waiting for a call from the bridge boys. I didn't see the car though. The ramps were purpose built for acceleration I think. Maybe wrong there though.

Mine host told me the same thing with the speed limit. Drive sensibly to the conditions and away you go. It made me understand why I was always getting overtaken at my 70 mph

Sat on 80-90 the rest of my time after that and never had any issues with police or other drivers.

Yes, you're pretty safe if you keep it under 100. It's 'policing by consent' ie don't be a dickhead and you'll be treated like a responsible adult who, like everyone, makes mistakes occasionally but doesn't do so deliberately. It's also why our coppers don't need to carry guns.