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.

NSW Proof fines are for revenue purposes

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Tone2, Jun 8, 2012.

  1. As is we needed any proof, but this seems to confirm it's about the money not the deterrent:

    They're the only bits on topic, so no more detail in that link.

  2. It just amazes me how they say that it isn't for revenue raising yet they budget in how much they expect to make off them.
  3. You need proof? Of course it's to raise revenue!

    With Rome almost broke, Lucius Cornelius Sulla proscribed a bunch of wealthy people he thought weren't doing their bit for Rome (or didn't support his dictatorship) and confiscated all their assets. It filled the coffers, and put the fear of Dog into the elite.

    Governments have been doing this sh1t forever. Of course it's to serve a higher purpose, to protect us. Of course it's all for our own good.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. It's not a tax it's a LEVY!
    Love that one.
  5. That is so apt IMO.

    Funny shit.
  6. Don't forget ****head Barry O'Farrel's commitment to RedFlex - Sorry I meant 'road safety'. Huge increase in mobile speed cameras and 'safety cameras'... At least they're making the signs bigger though than the small A5 ones hidden behind trees/in the grass. (Still better than no warning like you Victorians)
  7. It's not a levy.. it's an EXCISE!
  8. [​IMG]

    Great Scot! I think you're right!
  9. Just thinking outside the square for a minute.

    We (the citizens) could really screw the goverment over. All we have to do is NOT speed (or more precisely, not get caught speeding). Within a few months they would be broke.

    Then just to really screw them over, not only do we not speed, but we keep having accidents and dying.
    • Like Like x 5
  10. Firstly who needs proof. If cameras were about safety rather than revenue there would for example, be a bloody big sign which said "Red Light camera at intersection" on dangerous intersections that had them. This would almost guarrantee no-one went through red. Instead they hide them to get fines.

    Heard this suggested last night, bs2mick. I would certainly have an impact on the revenue of the private companies where they are used to operate cameras. But a bit like stopping buying petrol from a particular compay to force the price of petrol down, it would work if everyone did it but good luck organising that.
  11. This would cause the government to lower speed limits even more

    in fact it may revert motoring to its infancy where a person need be in front of the vehicle constantly, waving a red flag to warn of the vehicles approach
  12. yep. grand idea. except for the bit where they jack up the price of milk to $10l to cover the missing greed scam revenue
  13. I wonder who owns redflex, they seem to be getting A LOT of government contracts recently...
  14. Redflex is an ASX listed company. Last year Macquarie bank tried but failed in a takeover bid. I could be wrong but I believe the companies principal founders are ex police officers.