Printable View
"The placement of these cameras is also a civil rights issue, creating the issuing of a summons and possible fines and jail time to the owner of a vehicle and not necessarily the actual driver of the vehicle. In many places around the country, these cameras have become nothing more than a money-maker for municipalities."
Right on, don't think this will ever happen here though, whatever happened to the old cat and mouse game hey?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Rightfoot
A false statement. This year the fatality rate is 13 while for the same time last year it was 30. source NT Police Police internet site
2008 was higher than 2007 but 1987 was a lot higher. Also the majority of accidents happened in built up areas or were a single car accident on a bush road with a driver under the influence. Nothing to do with reducing the speed limit. Though some motorists complained that it was now more dangerous with the speed restrictions as it would take them longer to drive from Darwin to Alice Springs as they wanted to do it in a day --one driver - non stop except for a feed and fuel stop.
FWIW I read that when the Speed Cameras were turned off on the Westgate Bridge (because of malfunctions) injury accidents dropped by 60%. Quod Erat Demonstrandum which is Latin for I told you so!
CHT
PS Italy increased open road speed limits significantly - fatalities immediately dropped by something like 20%
It's interesting how that in the US, the local municipality is responsible for speeding fines instead of the state. The state can therefore ban the things and look like heroes to the people. Here, it's the states that enforce traffic infringements and it would take a federal act to ban them. Good luck with that.
Under our constitution, I don't know that a Federal act would necessarily be binding on the States. Where's our resident constitutional lawyer? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by werdan
I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but I agree with you - I don't see anything in the constitution that would allow the commonwealth government to legislate in this area. Perhaps a bill of rights in the constitution might do so, but as it stands I can't see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by p38arover
For example, federal vehicle standards have no status in the territories or states until the state in question legislates to implement them, which would be in the same area of law.
John
Quid Erat Demonstratum's literal translation is "Thus it is demonstrated"Quote:
Originally Posted by C H T
but it still fits here :D No Ron I'm not trying to take your role - and I have probably spelt it wrong as well
I have driven in Italy. They are ****** crazy. From my observations they steer with their knees as one hand is blowing the horn and the other is giving the "horns of the cuckold" sign out the window. I remember seeing a large Italian mama and a short fat father in a $3000 suit with gold watch, gold cigarette holder, and three kids putting a three seater sofa on top of a Fiat 600 and then driving off flat out in the usual manner. First time there I was staggered to be doing 160 k's on the autostrada and getting flashes and horn blasts to get out of the way. Being passed at that speed by two carabinieri on motorcycles going considerably faster, with rifles slung across their backs. Then seeing them sitting having coffee in the next small town where we pulled off to eat. Must have been running late for their smoko.Quote:
Originally Posted by C H T
Which is why I use the abbreviation: QED :DQuote:
Originally Posted by blitz