Separate names with a comma.
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.
Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Farab, Oct 10, 2008.
australia has a very different concept of a 'network of long rural A roads' to britain.
still, be interesting to see what happens if you put them across regions with lots of intersections.
I'd love to see them on the big arterials around sydney. After doing the syd-mel run regularly for many years now, the traffic is much calmer through the victoria timed camera sections of the hume than anywhere else.
Why not make it mandatory that when you get your drivers license they implant a GPS chip in your head so they catch you every single time you exceed the speed limit! They could link it to your credit card or bank account and deduct money for the offence instantly!
What I find strange is that the over the past few years, the road rules have become stricter, number of speed cameras etc have dramatically increase and as a result two things have happened. Revenues and road deaths have also increased. Makes you wonder what there real goal is!
what's your point there tammy?
Number of road users has gone up in the last few years as well.
As a curiosity, how have road rules become stricter? They don't seem to have changed at all for most of the population. (especially those who don't carry 6yo pillions or carry dogs on the tank of their bikes).
Average speed cameras should be very easy to understand, and they don't penalise you for a quick overtaking manoeuvre like a fixed point speed camera does. And if it bothers you, then you can always stop for a piss/smoke/watch the scenery break if you were stupid anyway.
What you're saying is that you want cart blanche to speed where-ever you like. ok, fair call for some privacy and human rights issues, but they don't apply to road use. If you think the speed limits are too low, then civil disobedience isn't exactly the best way to get them changed, and you can hardly blame the police for upholding one law (like murder or larceny) and then just ignoring others (like theft or speeding).
You know what the goal is as much as anyone else - to be seen to do something about reducing the road toll. THe details don't matter.
Hoon laws were introduced.
that isn't a road rule, it's an idiot human law! THe penalties have changed, but the road rules haven't. It is still contrary to the law to do 40+ over the limit or lose traction. Those rules have been there much longer than the hoon laws.
I am all for point to point cameras, as it means you can overtake people over the limit if required, or to get out of tight spots.
Not so keen on having them on every single road though, as this then goes back to the debate of privacy vs "security"
And then pull over and sit by the road so your average time between points doesn't earn you a fine?
They are a disgusting, oppressive idea that should be opposed by ALL motorists.
they do have a tolerance, and that allows you to overtake someone smartly even if you are over the point limit for a time. Besides, in the time you are travelling slower behind someone you build on your lower average.
Maths isn't a real big strong point here, is it!
Besides, for the weekend warriors, it shouldn't matter. For the commuters, most roads they would consider putting this system on are so packed you can't get above the average even if your instant speeds in the middle are double posted. They do act as good traffic calming measures though from my experience of them in this country already.
Not really... The moment you've exceed the speed limit, your average speed is too high and you've got to slow down a corresponding amount. How much do you have to slow down? For how long? The paranoia eats at the back of your mind and turns average-speed-camera travel into nonstop speedo watching.
The tolerance has never been publicised for the Victorian ones, so who knows how much you can 'overtake' and 'get out of a tight spot' without being slapped with a speeding fine?
The first 30 minutes out of and first 30 minutes into Melbourne via the Hume Highway are the worst 30 minute segments of my motoring life. For the most part I don't speed (especially not on the Hume), but I can live without having to stare at my speedo unflinchingly.
Exactly!The point of REASONABLE traffic enforcement has long been exceeded to a let's get them mentality! Look at all the tactics they use, the amount of unmarked traffic cars, no room for officer discretion, etc.
And why is it always speeding, because its the easiest to "sell" and the easiest to measure/quantify and issue a fine accordingly.
you ride down the hume
Really?! Wow! Awesome!
How long before the tolerance is reduced because the original setup didn't have an effect on the road-toll?
That is less than ideal. Everyone should be able to travel at approximately the speed limit, in the correct lane to allow faster vehicles to overtake.
Maths is irrelevant.
Please explain to me how having every motorist on a road preoccupied with trying to figure out how fast they need to go so their average doesn't score them a fine; improves how much attention they are paying to the road and the traffic?
Please also explain how having vehicles adjust their speed deliberately below the speed limit, and not just by 'enough' but by a 'safe margin' to ensure they do not get a fine, on any road helps improve traffic flow and reduces congestion.
The state governments road plan should involve increased and improved access to public transport, to reduce congestion and improve travel times.
That reasoning for introducing this system is defeatist and pathetic.
Let's just have scented candles along the side of the road, eh?
Perhaps a break-in radio frequency that plays Enya, hmm?
It's another tool for the state to use to pull money out of citizens and pretend they are doing something about 'safety'.
Besides which, no system is without a flaw. Perfectly innocent people WILL suffer financial hardship and inconvenience with the introduction of such a system.
Yah. Needed to get to the 2008 Icicle Ride and back in a single weekend (friday arvo down, sunday arvo back).
As overpoliced and boring as the Hume is, it's undeniably the shortest and fastest route when travelling at the speed limit.
I love the way you keep implying that "perfectly innocent" people get fined for exceeding the limit. If you really are perfectly innocent, your average speed is lower than the limit. Maths really IS the point!
As for how fast should you go. If the needle doesn't go over the limit, your average is below the finable limit. Is this really so hard to understand? The whole point of these systems is that it isolates those who, under the current scheme, do 140 everywhere except the 50 metres each side of a fixed camera.
The argument isn't whether 100 is a good limit compared to 140. THe argument is the behaviour of point to point speed measurement compared to instant (or single point) measurement.
At this juncture, all you are doing is saying that you want to exceed the speed limit and you just don't want to get caught.
thats your problem.....cann river is almost as quick at err motorcycle speed limits
You're a strange man Bonox. Do you ride a scooter?
No good can come of a system like this!
I ride a scooter in the same way that optimus prime is a car. So yes, I could say I ride a scooter. What does my sig say?
No good can come of this huh - according to the original article,
"On the M1 the number of casualties halved after average-speed cameras were introduced on a contraflow between junctions 6a and 10."
which is apparently not a good thing?
Perhaps what you mean is the british drivers will always be much better than the perennially stupid australian drivers, which is why no good can come of it here?
I love the idea of the timed residential street ones as well - as will anyone who has lots of twats using their street as a drag strip to go faster than the main road right next door.
Bonox, there's a job here for you in the Victorian government, they'd love you.
Coming soon: RFID vehicle identification...
It uses number plate recognition.
Last year I received a fine for toll evasion for the Cross City Tunnel, when I had never driven on the thing.
Apparently the number plate on my bike matched what they thought they could read on a WHITE PANEL VAN.
Lucky it was a private tolling company. I wrote a letter that fixed it.
Mind you, it cost my time to write, print, and $0.50 to post.
What's a day off work to go into court and explain to a judge that your car couldn't possibly have been doing 200km/hr and changed colour between cameras, worth?
In the interests of congestion and environmental impact, everyone should be making a reasonable effort to get to their destination as swiftly as safely possible.
This = speed limit [safety aspect dubious, but we'll entertain the idea for the sake of argument].
If ANYONE gets in a situation where they need to accelerate to stay safe, ie: get out of someone's blind-spot, avoid driving next to a truck or bus as a corner approaches, accelerate to merge - they will need to compensate by driving below the limit again.
They also need to figure that out in their brain, and apply what they determine to the road.
Definitely an unnecessary distraction for motorists + a thousand vehicles on a single roadway, overtaking/not-overtaking adjusting speed to, over and below the limit again will NOT improve traffic snarls and congestion.
But whatever 'positives' come from point-to-point speed measurement MUST be compared to the negatives; even completely aside from how much we fail as a democracy by letting our government fine and tax us into blind obedience of flawed policy.
Even if that were true, I also:
- Don't want the hardship of resolving an incorrectly issued fine.
- Don't want to sit in traffic that is worse than it could be because people are scared enough to drive at 20km/hr under the speed limit.
- Don't want to be run off the road by someone too busy thinking about how they need to adjust their speed so they don't get a fine.
- Don't want to emergency brake behind idiots who see the exit camera and throw the panic-anchor.
All of which would increase in possibility/frequency with the introduction of a point-to-point system.