Who the heck would vote "Yes"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rmp

It does if other factors improving safety have outweighed any negative effects mobiles may have had. There are many studies that prove that mobile use has a negative effect on safety, specifically concentration and especially not hands-free simply being able to operate the controls, let alone texting.

---

It seems that these academic studies are at odds with the fact that the empirical evidence shows that they do not, in real life, have a negative effect on safety - it would have to be a big stretch to assume that the amount of mobile phone use in those states that forbid it is just as high as in those that allow it (although if this is the case, the ban is obviously totally futile).

In my view the most likely reason for this is that mobile phone use is only one of a wide variety of distractions that can cause accidents, and drivers who allow mobile phone use to distract them from driving are the same ones that allow other activities to distract them, from changing the channel on the radio, to watching the speedo, to eating lunch, to dealing with the interkid warfare in the back seat. With the result that even without the mobile phone, those drivers have a similar accident anyway, and the ones who do not allow phone use to distract them do not. (In case you are wondering, no, I do not use a mobile phone while driving, and if you phone me while I am, do not expect an answer - ask my kids!)

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barra1

Travelling on the Hume Freeway I saw a Ferrari being done for speeding - mate, a fine to that bloke is nothing - losing double points will have (hopefully) a greater impact on that particular goose.:)

---

and thats exactly why double demerit points are used and not double the fine. The thought of losing their licence scares more people than the thought of losing a couple of hundred bucks.

I do however agree with Ron about the clowns who when on double demerit weekends they sit below the speed limit because they are scared of being books, its ok to sit on 100km/hr in a 100 zone people, thats the speed limit. People do it when there is a Highway Patrol car in front of them, i regularly see a Highway car doing 90km/hr or 95km/hr with a train of cars sitting behind them not wanting to pass, if he is going below the speed limit and you can pass without exceeding it then its ok to go around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

It seems that these academic studies are at odds with the fact that the empirical evidence shows that they do not, in real life, have a negative effect on safety - it would have to be a big stretch to assume that the amount of mobile phone use in those states that forbid it is just as high as in those that allow it (although if this is the case, the ban is obviously totally futile).

In my view the most likely reason for this is that mobile phone use is only one of a wide variety of distractions that can cause accidents, and drivers who allow mobile phone use to distract them from driving are the same ones that allow other activities to distract them, from changing the channel on the radio, to watching the speedo, to eating lunch, to dealing with the interkid warfare in the back seat. With the result that even without the mobile phone, those drivers have a similar accident anyway, and the ones who do not allow phone use to distract them do not. (In case you are wondering, no, I do not use a mobile phone while driving, and if you phone me while I am, do not expect an answer - ask my kids!)

John

---

True that mobiles are just one distraction, but a distraction they are nevertheless. The academic studies are conclusive, and they make sense, so I don't see why they should be doubted, and comparing their results against the completely uncontrolled road safety stats is not in my view realistic. The problem is there are so many other unmeasured factors about road safety in general you cannot ascribe a statistical movement to any one factor, especially because as someone else said the authorities do not measure data in such a way as to draw the sort of conclusions we're after. I went into this during the bullbar debate.

For example, road deaths have decreased over the last 20 years. Why? Are we better at driving? Safer cars, and if so which features? Emphasis on speed? Drink? Road design? Probably and almost certainly all of the above, pick your factor to support your argument of the day. Yet we also need to factor in total number of cars on the road, and distance travelled per year as a nation. So many factors, which is why focused studies are important.

As you say, whether a ban is in place or not is somewhat academic. Depends on whether that law is enforced and whether people take notice of it. After all, there's a ban on speeding!

The nonsense continues....

EXCLUSIVE: LEADFOOT motorists face a massive crackdown, with a phalanx of extra fixed and mobile speed cameras to be deployed within weeks.
In the biggest expansion of Victoria's speed-trap network since the late 1980s, 31 new fixed cameras will be erected and another 22 existing sites upgraded.

And mobile cameras will be snapping away for an extra 3000 hours a month a 50 per cent increase on current hours.

The blitz which police hope will drive the state's road toll below 300 is also expected to result in hundreds of thousands more fines and extra revenue of more than $48 million.

"It's going to be really, really aggressive," Deputy Commissioner Ken Lay said.

$50m Victoria speed camera blitz aimed to lower road carnage | Herald Sun



Ken Lay :zzz: .....another zealot who thinks you can control the road toll through the hip pocket.


_______________________

Lyndon.

Discovery Td5....Enjoy responsibly

remember the speed LIMIT is just that. A maximum limit not the speed at which you must travel. Can be frustrating I know. I drive about 40-60K/kms a year. Learn to live with it. Take a few deep breaths and relax. Speed doesn't kill anyone, it's the impact at the end that kills. And usually being frustrated leads to higher risks being taken and more chance of having an incident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by warren9981

remember the speed LIMIT is just that. A maximum limit not the speed at which you must travel. Can be frustrating I know. I drive about 40-60K/kms a year. Learn to live with it. Take a few deep breaths and relax. Speed doesn't kill anyone, it's the impact at the end that kills. And usually being frustrated leads to higher risks being taken and more chance of having an incident.

---

I don't care if people travel at a lower speed. I do care when they deliberately drive in such a manner to prevent overtaking.

mmmm......havn't read the whole thread, have we? :p

Its not the fines that concern me as I have not had one since the early 80's.

But I do not want is my family to be taken out by some twit who has paid many traffic infringements fines per year and still has the capacity to drive.

Sorry, but your position is simplistic and should be rejected outright. I'm all for increasing the driving standards of drivers.


_____________

Lyndon.

Discovery Td5.....Enjoy responsibly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace

I do however agree with Ron about the clowns who when on double demerit weekends they sit below the speed limit because they are scared of being books, its ok to sit on 100km/hr in a 100 zone people, thats the speed limit. People do it when there is a Highway Patrol car in front of them, i regularly see a Highway car doing 90km/hr or 95km/hr with a train of cars sitting behind them not wanting to pass, if he is going below the speed limit and you can pass without exceeding it then its ok to go around.

---

Sorry mate, but you have too much faith in the technology. Speed cameras book people for travelling under the limit from time to time. I've seen it, and thousands of Victorians lost were fined and no doubt some lost their licence before the government acknowledged they were inaccurate and refunded peoples money and points.

I'm not saying they are wrong all the time- but it does happen. Unfortunately you get the fine weeks later and have virtually no means of defending yourself.

That's why I always slow when going past a camera. I'm sorry if it annoys other people but tough luck.

Earlier this year I was driving on a 60k piece of road and saw someone get flashed ahead of me by a mobile speed camera. I slowed, so did eveyone else. Next thing a guy in front of me gets flashed at 55k. :eek: So then I went past it at 40. I didn't get fined. Either it was set to an incorrect threshold speed or it was just reading badly. Either way all those people would have had the devils job defending it. :(

It's a monumental source of revenue, and one all states will be desperately chasing due to the GFC.

I don't think double demerit points are the answer.
I'm a big advocate for harsher penalties on certain driving offences, I don't believe though that fixed speed cameras and hidden camera cars on highways are the answer and the fact that spouses can trade there points via nominating another driver to get out of loosing their licences.
The behavior ( sometimes loutish) that occurs every day on the roads is totally unacceptable to the general driving community and down right dangerous. Policing can't be done sitting behind a fine processing desk mailing out fines collected via cameras etc.
There needs to be active policing with visible presence on the roads, and not just on public holidays. Police these days have become too complacent in their "turning a blind eye to the numerous vehicles in unroadworthy condition driving on our roads, and some lack of obeying traffic rules.
I think the police these days complain they are under resourced, Blah Blah, and the fact that paperwork is time consuming. Tough titty I say, if the law is not going to be carried out then rewrite the road law books if they are out dated. Omit the rule that says it's illegal to pass on solid broken lines. Turn a blind eye to the turning in front of traffic, dangerously making turns from the extreme left lane to the extreme right lane because they missed their turn at the last second. Change ADR rules about indicators on vehicles, most drivers don't want them any way. Remove the rule about drivers having their vision impaired by token, idols, etc dangling from thier rear vision mirrors, remove the requirement for road worthiness faults on wind screens, a crappy windscreen is just as impairing as the dangles form the mirrors, but one a blind eye is turned to. ( the old religious discrimination argument about workshipping idols)
Why have all these stupid rules?
If they are out of date and can't be enforced, then why have of them?
Take a look at some third world countries, it's a free for all as far as what you do on the roads, and we sit back and have a laugh and say how stupid they are in some of the antics.
We should make sure we Don't slip back to what they are doing.
Just because some one is given a licence these days, doesn't mean they CAN DRIVE
The roads appear to have become a "fun park" with little regards to the consequences that some drivers attitudes they display.
More active policing would help with the P plate hoon situations many of which cause death.
Many of you may disagree with me, but it's a fact if you are innocent then why the fear?
And the dob in a driver idea sometimes put forward, WHY should the general public do the policing, why should we be the vigilanties.
Get more visible police on the roads, they can find $$$ for everything else.
They complain about the cost that carnage imposes on the public, the inquests, the compensation, etc etc.
I've personally seen the tragic results of road carnage not once but twice. And when it happens to you it leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.
Self regulation on the roads, doesn't work. We need a big brother out there with a big stick to give us a knock on the head occasionally to say, that is not right.

I apologise for the Rant........ I just get sick of people complaining about getting pinged and how unfair it is, revenue raising blah blah.
WE live in a democratic society, with a lot of freedom and as a civilised society we have RULES. WE also have the freedom of choice to contribute to fine revenue or not.
But then "It'snotworthcomplaining!

Speed is not the biggest road killer, but it's the easiest to Police.

#1 biggest killer is fatigue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You don't see the Fuzz actively trying to do something about that do you.
#2 biggest killer is poor road design.

Take a look at the Pacific Highway between Tweed and Sydney, it a
joke.

Most Drivers on the road shouldn't have a licence, they are just not switched on enough the drive a motor vehicle.

I reckon 90% of people can't even be bothered or don't even know how to indicate when going on a roundaout.

Double Demerit points would actually cause more accidents beacause of the increase in frustrated drivers taking more risks.

Take a look at the BIG picture it's right in front of you.