Victorians caught speeding <10k/m over limit

Why is speeding an issue?
if the sign says 60 do 60 70 do 70 and so on.
Speedo error? we all know that so ,do what the needle says. Why try to calculate an extra 10kmph because of the error margin.

Most of us learnt that speeding is illegal when we got our licences, that has never changed. Unless your a complete moron, and think your little bit won;t hurt anybody.

Try pulling someones dead sister, brother, father ,mother, or grandparent out of a car that was wrecked/ forced off the road by someone who has sped! Its great fun!!


It seems some people need a real good reality check and maybe a new book of excuses. The old ones are wearing a bit thin.


john

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobHay

That is why their Number Plates read..."Victoria! On the move...........to Queensland" :D:p

---

__________________________________________________ ________________

I was just about to post the same comment Rob >

Hodgo

I think the problem is speed limits are often set with little regard to the actual road. In general, I believe many open road speed limits could be higher than what they are.

It used to be that many limits were 110, often they are now set at 100, regardless of the fact that car technology has progressed in leaps and bounds with regards to dynamics, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnE

Why is speeding an issue?
if the sign says 60 do 60 70 do 70 and so on.

---

It's easy to take the moral high ground on this issue so while I agree that if you speed and get caught then stop complaining but I think an attitude that reflects reality is safer.

While there will be plenty of people who will jump in and say they can maintain exactly 100kph without looking at the speedo, in reality many people cannot and for good reason. They may be new drivers, in cars they are not familiar with or are just not that precise. Hills also make quite a difference as well.

I do not want every driver looking at their speedo instead of the road. I know I look at mine a lot more when I come up to a fixed radar, it is reflexive.

Now if doing 3kph over the limit really is dangerous then they should test people's ability to maintain the speed with zero margin for error. But they don't because they know in reality in doesn't matter. And the statement I highlighted above suggests that they know this.

So I agree that 70 in a 60 zone is dangerous and they can raise fines and demerit points all they want but to book people for 63 in a 60 zone will create a system where many drivers are worrying about their speedo instead of watching the things they should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

In favour of Victoria is the fact that they have radar speed indicators on many of their roads which tell you exactly what speed you are doing. There is one near Wodonga on the Hume Hwy and another on the Western Hwy on the way out to Ballarat. There are probably many others. Having passed one of them you should know your speedo error and drive accordingly.

---

Last time we went through that one in a mates ute I had the speedo sitting right on 110kmh. Dang thing told we were doing 85:eek:.
No wonder the trip to melbourn and back took so long.

My Two Cents.

Just got back from a return drive to Adelaide last night. Sat on the speed limit most of the way. (George130 - those speed checks were spot on measured by my GPS!).

I found the 100 - 110kmh range is a comfortable cruising range for the Defender - and I can still hear the radio;).

What gets me is the uncompromising nature of a speed camera vs. a cop.

Here's my scenario:

One spot I came up behind a B-double, in the dark, doing about 95kmh, uphill and slowing. I judged it safe to overtake. I began the overtake manoeuvre and as I came up next to the front trailer I realised I was approaching a crest - still plenty of room but not as much as I had initially judged. I had 2 choices - Brakes or Accelerator - I chose the latter.

Wound her up to 127.6kmh (That's fast for me!:eek:) and safely (IMHO) completed the pass and returned to the speed limit.

A camera would have convicted me however I probably could have talked my way out of it if a cop got me.:angel:

Was I breaking the law – mea culpa
Did I misjudge the pass – I was a little surprised:eek:
Did I recover the situation – Yes :)
Was I driving dangerously - I don't believe so.;)

Cheers


(Probably 4 cents worth!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Numpty's Missus

You might be surprised....most people tend to :D:D

---

Can't agree there. One only grows up when one skips a generation, that is, swaps from being a child to a parent, or a parent to a grandparent etc.

I am 58, but I am still only an off-spring, a child, not a parent. :D

I still feel like a child, I still drive with the enthusiasm of a child, and I still whine like a child when I get booked. :mad:

Age has caused some caution, that is why I drive Land Rovers instead of motorbikes, and don't drink when operating motor vehicles any more. (Out of consideration for others, I never drink-drove, only drink-rode) :nazilock:

Seriously though, the whole safety-watchit thing can be taken too far. Speeding when conditions are inappropriate has always been, and still is, dumb. But enjoying operating ones motor vehicle safely but with more enthusiasm than the law allows is not dumb or dangerous in the appropriate conditions. The laws are there to guide people without sufficient judgement to decide what is appropriate, and in the way of laws we all must abide. If we get caught then so be it, it was our choice to have a bit of fun and we pay the price.

Dangerous driving is always dumb, and it is very dangerous to spend too much time with ones eyes on the speedo and not on the road. It is also dangerous to drive under the speed limit - it frustrates other motorists and can lead to inappropriate behaviour.

That is why a certain leeway is needed in speed limit enforcement - if one is required to be with one or two k's of the speed limit one either stares at the speedo too much or drives too slowly to be safe.

Sighhh.... I wish I still had my Norton!!

Cheers,
Paul

1.Judging your speed by someone else's vehiclel assumes too many dangerous issues. Not least of which is that they may be driving too slowly. WHICH IS an offence, by the way. And one of the major causes of road rage IMHO
2. Not only is it dangerous not to speed it will result in more deaths and accidents, as is shown by all the current statistics. All traffic regulations are premised on the fact that Safety comes first. So for example overtaking requires an increase in speed to overtake and then a speedy return to the original lane to ensure a safe move. Especially if the vehicle being overtaken is more than 5kmh under the limit.
3. Has anyone talking about speed, as the main issue, ever looked at the points and fines for apparently unenforced transgressions such as driving in the right hand lane on roads where the limit is above 80kmh. It is more points and more money than speeding at the first level in Vic. Guess what they struggle to enforce it but they rate it above speeding???
4. More accidents are caused by tiredness (boredom) and lack of attention than anything . Higher highway speeds have been shown to reduce this, but revenue drops considerably.

Oh well....had my say...nothing will change. we need a party prepared to prove its claims that 5kmh makes a difference, Totally corrupt statistics there, by the way.

In the UK there is a mixture of fixed (yellow box at side of road - sometimes behind trees and signs) and mobile cameras. Most by a significant margin are fixed.

This has been occured as the fixed cameras are put in place by local councils who are allowed to keep the proceeds. Even the government no longer pretends that the fixed cameras are about road safety. Mobile cameras are still done by the police.

Over the last decade while the number of cameras has increased the number of road accident deaths have also risen. This is after a long period of the numbers declining. Seems that the difference is that while the police maintained driving style the cameras are unable to do this. Also a number of police forces have all but removed their traffic police as a cost cutting measure leaving policing to the cameras.

You will often see the slogan - Speed Kills. Please remember that this is taken out of context the full quote is 'Inappropriate speed for the circumstances kills', not quite the short nappy headline that the press / marketing people like. Changes the meaning a little though.

Speed kills was what the medical profession was saying would happen to people who used Stephensons Rocket train. They thought that at the speeds it traveled everyone would die as they would not be able to get any oxygen. Funny that it has come back and also relates to transport.