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.

[Melb] Speed cams ban

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by CamKawa, Jul 1, 2006.

  1. Speed cams ban
    Brendan Roberts

    Assaults on operators force company's hand

    MOBILE speed cameras will be switched off after 8pm across the state after a string of attacks on camera operators.

    Police Minister Tim Holding yesterday announced that private speed camera operator Tenix would reduce its night operations by three hours, ending at 8pm instead of 11pm from today.

    Police radar guns and fixed speed cameras, however, will continue to operate around the clock.

    The Opposition yesterday slammed the decision, saying it could lead to the deaths of more young drivers.

    Mr Holding said attacks on camera operators had led to the temporary wind-down.

    In the most recent attack last week a speed camera worker was threatened and a brick thrown through the window of his car as he sat inside.

    The incident, about 8.45pm on Canterbury Rd, Blackburn, left the operator covered in glass and suffering cuts, grazes and shock.

    "The Government condemns utterly any member of the public who tries to take the law into their own hands by attacking Tenix operators," Mr Holding said.

    "They have a very tough job to do.

    "The work that they do in operating speed cameras around the state is part of our road safety strategy. We understand Tenix has taken action in terms of withdrawing the program from after 8pm as a temporary measure.

    "Police members will still be able to operate radar guns to make sure that speeding motorists don't take advantage of that period."

    Opposition transport spokesman Terry Mulder said young drivers would see the move as a green light to speed.

    "Previously, speed camera operators worked from 5am to 11pm, there was a big gap overnight and this is where most young people were dying on our roads. This gap has just increased by three hours," he said.

    "Young people won't take long to realise from 8pm onwards it's a no speed-camera zone and that's a worry."

    Mr Mulder said the decision would leave a dent in the Government's revenue that would most likely be filled by the allocation of more speed cameras to busy roads at peak times.

    A Tenix spokesman said the operator would talk to Victoria Police and the Government on permanent measures to protect speed camera operators from motorists
  2. With the over-policing of speed on the roads to the point of targeting the majority and hitting them with repetitive minor speeding offences, how long did the government think it would take before the public starts to rebel in an ever escalating sense?

    Fixed speed cameras are being shot out. Mobile camera operators are being attacked. What will be the next step?

    Attacking someone who is doing their job is despicable, but sadly these people represent a vulnerable part of an almost universally despised revenue raising policy.
  3. The really worrying thing is with both the government and the opposition in a speed camera revenue raising trance who else does one for vote for?
  4. Yeah attacking the operator's pretty low, but then they don't seem to care very much about their little black boxes getting smashed and sprayed.
  5. I think that little quote says quite a bit. :roll:
  6. Indeed. No matter how many times that they try to tell us that it's not about revenue raising, that it's all about safety, someone, somewhere, still manages to let the odd Freudian slip tell us exactly what's going on.

    It's all about revenue. "Safety" is only the sales pitch.

    I don't deny that speed cameras have some impact on reducing overall traffic speeds, but they don't stop the dangerous ones who know full well not to go hooning near fixed or mobile speed cameras. A mobile or fixed road-side camera on some major thoroughfare doesn't stop Mick and his mates from ripping up the back-streets in the middle of the night.
  7. does it what bluey!!! but let them do it.. busy roads.. like the monash? good work, cause at peak times theres a snowballs chance in hell of getting anywhere near the speed limit, exceeding it is not an option.

    i read a report the other day that was spot on.. said that if speed cameras really were safety cameras, they would charge $50 per ticket, but have 400000000000 camera's around to stop people speeding. and how spot on is it. right now speed cameras are only where there are the most recorded speeding offences, not the highest accident areas.
    i dunno where i read the report, and cant find it again, sorry.
  8. My heart bleeds for Tenix.
  9. Spot on man... it's f'n BS!!
    It's always been about revenue and always will be about revenue...
    If it wasn't about revenue they wouldn't be give a toss about someone doing 3km/h over the speed limit :evil:
  10. It's always about revenue.

    However, in today's corporate world, you need to ensure that that you're not slandering and have FULL PROOF that it is what they're doing.

    That's why they'll never mention that it's to raise revenue. They'll suggest, imply, nudge and do everything but mention "How do we get money from this stretch of road?"
  11. you dont have to speed to be dangerous.. in all honesty i think the money raised would be better spent training more coppers and putting them out on the roads to catch the idiots that run acorss 3 lanes at a time, dont indicate, tailgate, jump on their brakes for no reason, and drive in all other ways dangerous.. but of course, that would cost money, not raise it.

    blueys quote is the closest ive ever heard the government admit its a revenue raising excercise and they do allocate speed camera revenue as a part of their annual budget.

  12. didnt you hear the propoganda!! speed kills... nothing else!

    (i've always wanted to see an ad saying something like "speed doesnt kill, bad driving does. are you a bad driver?")
  13. and to everyone who just said that speeding fines are revenue raisers...

    would you rather pay more tax?
  14. Last I looked, vehicles were still a rather essential item for purposes of many people managing to make a living. Implementing a system of over-policing whereby people are losing their licenses due to automated 3kph over offenses on major thoroughfares, and thereby causing financial hardship to an individual is not a fair way to raise revenue, especially when it can be rather difficult to maintain speed to within +/-5kph if not looking at the speedo every 10 secs, or in the face of ADR speedometers only being required to be accurate to +/-10%.

    If the govt. needs more revenue, then while most people would rather not have to pay more taxes, but given the choice between paying more tax which is a legitimate source of revenue raising for govts, as opposed to being sold a farce that in its implementation and penalties can severely impact one's ability to earn a living, I think most people would rather simply be paying more tax.
  15. yeah I'd love to pay more tax... please!! :roll:
  16.  Top
  17. Ok
    Enough of the bullshit about 3kmh over.
    My cousin is a police officer.
    The regulations for police vehicles and radar is they still implement the 10% rule and will allow more leeway for bikes because they do accelerate quicker than cars.
    With speed cameras the tolerance is 3kmh but the cameras are calibrated to go off at 7 kmh above the limit then 3kmh is deleted from the speed hence people being done at 64- 74-84 etc.
    Now cut the bullshit about 3kmh.
  18. I’ve just gone through this thread. You're the only one that's mentioned anything about being 3km/h over.
  19. Hooray!!!
    Could lead the government revenue deprived.
    If that what it takes, then it's a good thing.
    It's what some people have been driven to.
    a very boring one
    lets hope it's permanent
    Will cost the government more money though.
    lets go!
    I'm onto it already
    sad but true
    no mention of permanently reducing speed camera numbers or the severity of the fines - a missed opportunity.

  20. How about that piece of prose there or did you miss it?