Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Hume Point to Point Cameras Faulty

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by joetdm, Oct 18, 2010.

  1. All this came along when a 20 year old woman from Wallan was visited by the plod and told she was traveling on the Hume at 158kph in her mazda 2

    Was going to loose licence for 12 months and car impounded.
    She denied, but was lucky that one of the cops agreed that the car in question would have trouble holding those speeds.
    So he followed it up and it's been thrown out.
    Apparently 9 cases in a few years...
    WTF! I think they may be refunding 68,000 fines.

  2. Oops, missed that post......8-[
  3. Personally I preferred this new thread, which is labelled relevant to the topic at hand, and in the correct forum section.

    As for the topic itself, it's fairly typical of the way the speed camera system works in Victoria: Guilty until proven innocent.
  4. No, Flux, it's "guilty until proved guilty".

    The boss of Reflex was on Neil Mitchell trying to dig himself out of a hole and doing a pretty pisspoor job about it, too.

    The cops and the government always pay lip service to complaints about speed cameras and in this case they did it as well. It took a young woman in a clapped out Datsun 120Y to get the Ring Road cameras shut down after she was pinged at doing some speed way above the capability of the car. This time, it was "Melissa" in her Mazda 2 who was clocked at over 150 km/h, a speed the cops reluctantly admitted was unlikely to be achieved by the car.

    How much traffic goes up the Hume each day? Heaps, I'll bet. And how many people were booked wrongly since they were installed, not just the past 3 years?

    The authorities need to realise that aside from the fact that you're wrongly booked, there are the ramifications that follow, such as loss of licence, possible loss of job, expenses incurred, and most significantly, what your insurer will do with regards to premiums or whether they'll actually give you insurance.
  5. as if that car couldn't do those speeds ;)

    but srs, its always guilty until proven innocent.
  6. In my humble view, the whole Speed Camera Paradigm is unconstitutional. If part of our system of justice includes the presumption of innocence then this system is fundamentally flawed as no common person can argue his case against the government and this is a fundamental injustice. Not many would have the resources to fight in court against a system that has implied impunity. Imagine if every single fine was challenged in court? The system could not handle one tenth of that. The camera system can never be flawless, this has been proven time and again yet the mantra is consistently held that it is and that it is the centre piece of the Victorian Government’s Road safety campaign.

    The steady reductions in the road toll are due primarily to "Safer Cars" being progressively introduced to the Australian car fleet and concentration of works on “Black Spots”. Claims by road authorities of success of their speed camera programs is false and they are in fact claiming success for behavioural programs by ignoring the engineering outcomes of "safer cars" and “safer roads”. Politicising of road safety and police – by forcing both into the same box – means loss of public regard for Police – as the average person sees no distinction between politicised messages from an Administrative Department and Police, who are there to uphold the law. Also high visibility policing is vastly more effective than robotic enforcement as evidenced here http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/reports/muarc149.html. Ultimately, the Minister and his party are the problem here – road safety is a cash cow for pork barrelling at the next election.
  7. Wolve, not being a constitutional lawyer I can't agree or refute your statement about speed camera presumption of guilt. I thought that the constitution was basically a document about how government functions.

    The rest of what you say, however, is spot on. But despite what we think about the current government's attitude towards road policing, the other mob's the same. Bailleu so far hasn't "pledged" to repay the fines or in fact, to do anything regarding the speed camera network.

    The thing is, the Liberals haven't really given us anything worthwhile that would make us consider them as a viable alternative government.
  8. And if it had been one of us, we'd have been automatically guilty and had the vehicle impounded.

    I wonder what made her seem so innocent to the copper?
  9. Well, "one of us" tends to ride a bike that can do more than double the speed limit. Some of us, triple the limit...

    Anyway, as we don't have FNPs can these P2P cameras ID us?
  10. Apparently it's due to clocks on the camera's being out of sync, on the order of several minutes in order to produce the 154 in 110 booking.

    Putting aside the idiocy of having a timing system measuring to an accuracy of within 1.13 seconds per km relying on multiple clocks it makes you wonder how often they're out by smaller increments.

    Sounds like all 68,000 should challenge their fines.
  11. not sure about down there, but up here we have at least 1 p2p section which reads only the rear plate
  12. Some of the cameras have front facing cameras but not the Craigieburn bypass section of the freeway.
  13. The guy from the camera company was fairly short for answers as was Ken Lay although he got more of a grilling on Faine than he did on Mitchell program.

    What i want to know is, how can they determine how many are faulty readings? And what happens if the fine you received lost your license?

    RACV is classic too, claiming turning camera off is irresponsible and doesn't follow the road safety message. UM......... I think we lost the road safety message a long time ago as far as camera's are concerned.
  14. It's sad to see how much the RACV have been bought off. They used to be a motorist's advocate group.
  15. Don't kid yourself. The RACV is a club for the boys. The main aim of it is to provide exclusive facilities for those lucky enough to get membership to them. They are funded by having a roadside breakdown service, insurance, finance and travel products, none of which are cheap by any means.

    That it proclaims to "represent motorists" is little more than a front, particularly when it advocates the righteousness of speed cameras.
  16. What I find amazing is how they're admitting and telling us there has only been 9 errors out of 68,000 fines in the last few years!
    What a load of bull. There must be thousands of others who can't afford or don't have the resources or time to fight it.

    At the same time, people have been flooding the radios.
    One I found disturbing is on truck company owner went to court to fight one of his trucks speeding.

    His defence included:

    All his trucks are limited to 110kph and had all the documentation to prove it.
    Total gps tracking of the truck in question at the time showing no speeding.

    Yet the magistrate threw it out... Like WTF is that!
    Even the speeding camera operaters on radio this morning were trying to brush it aside with a Too Bad attitude.
    One of the only time I was on Mitchelle's side...

    The whole thing is f&cked!
  17. You can contest any fine. You would be hard pressed arguing that this is unconstitutional.

    The problem however lies in the legal system, not the constitution. Common law was originally put in place to provide a fair system for those who could not afford it. ITs a bit different now. You can still appeal, but unless you are rich you dont have much chance. I have opionions on this (not good), but might save that for a different conversation

    Not sure if the point to point is working yet (should not be to far away now). I now make sure that when heading north, my first fuel stop is at that servo at wild horse mountain! That way I avoid the first camera! The second camera is just before the coloundra exit.
  18. You should be aware that the second camera at/near the Caloundra exit is also a "point" camera, it is a normal fixed speed camera, and is making a killing with people who assume it is only point to point and have been taking it easy or missed the first camera, as you indicate.

  19. I've just about had enough of these cameras. They are F#$&king everywhere. I also can't believe the amount of comments on todays news paper sites from morons stating that turning the cameras off would increase the road toll. The fact is people spend more time looking at their speedo these days than actually looking at the road.