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.

The Operation of Speed Cameras and Legal Gobbledegook

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by mjt57, Aug 16, 2006.

  1. I am browsing the mobile speed camera manual, located at http://snipurl.com/uzw6

    It's interesting to read how they state that the cameras cannot be used in such and such a manner. Then add a clause that effectively nullifies that particular criteria.

    Eg: 15.1 Criterion 5: Sites must not require a camera vehicle (or tripod) to be position:-

    (1) In a way that it is likely to cause any interuption to the traffic flow; or
    (2) In contravention of the Road Rules - Victoria

    Here's the kicker:

    Consideration may be given to exercising the exemption contained in Rule 197 (1) (c) of the Road Rules in relation to stopping on pathways, dividing strips and nature strips.

    These particular rules regarding parking or stopping in such areas are usually safety reasons based. Yet, they'll happily contravene the rules of physics in order to allow them to park in such areas.

    One of the other rules that determine a camera's location is whether Police (rank of Snr Sgt or above) have determined that the area is experiencing significant levels of excessive speed. It doesn't say what "significant" may be. No quantifying figures are given. ie. would it be 5% of all traffic, 10%, etc.?

    It goes on to say that cameras can be placed at the bottom of hills, but they have to be of a grade where a vehicle on a trailing throttle doesn't experience significant acceleration. But, again, the rule says that this can be overriden if the police deem it necessary.

    Another one - cameras should not be placed on bends, except that where excessive speeding, as determined by police or written complaints, or incidents of serious crashes. That is where I copped a fine. I came around this corner and there was a speed camera facing me on the other side of the road. Road was Princes Hwy between Orbost and Cann River.

    As far as I'm aware, this particular stretch of road isn't all that dangerous. Of course, the authorities may disagree - that perhaps one or two people in the past 20 years have run off the road or something.

    Finally, the rules say that a camera may not be placed within 200m of a speed limit sign. But again, that may be overridden.

    Whatever, the point that I'm trying to get across is that there seems to be a legal "out" for all criterion that stop the use of cameras in specific situations.
  2. Hi Mjt57,

    It doesen't matter were you are in the world.
    If you are looking for justice in a "Justice of the Law" you will never find it!
    This is why the Law is not "Black And White" so it can allow injustices to occur!

    Hey I agree with you! I set of rules for the general public and another for the rest!

    I suggest that you bend the rules not break them!

    Don't forget "You haven't broken the Law until you have been caught Breaking it!"

  3. The legal loopholes to allow placement of cameras where they have been legislated as unplaceable is in part so that there isnt a situation where a council simply places a speed sign every 200m on all of the roads or so an area where there have been known incidences involving 'speed as a factor' (bleh logically the velocity of the vehicle is always going to be a factor) that might otherwise be un camera-ble can be monitored.

    It would be a better solution if instead of penalising people for speeding and rolling the funds back into buying more cameras instead to reward people for doing the right thing, If I have a year without any speeding fines or driving related charges/fines and the police turned around and said "hey, thanks for being a responsible driver/rider, heres $100 off your next rego or licence costs" I'd be over the moon.
  4. Yeah and while they're at it how about they stop wasting money sending people to prison and instead give cash rewards to everyone who can go a year without killing someone, committing armed robbery etc.
  5. They do this in NSW with the silver and gold lisence systems.

    I think if they just set reasonble speed limits, people wouldn't care if the penalties were tough.

    The problem is you can go close to loosing your lisence for doing a perfectly reasonable speed.
  6. Some people will always want to go faster.
  7. True enough, a uick uestion though guys. The highway patrol, with their mobile radars sticking (sorta on the drivers side door). Can they get you from the other side of the road? and do they have a camera (so they can issue a fine later?)

    I've heard a lot of stories about them on both sides.

    Was wondering what you all thought.
  8. True. 15% of people, in fact. Study after study has shown that if there are no speed limits, 85% of people set there own speed limits at a point that most road engineers consider safe. But 15% will exceed that point.
    But set a reduced limit to below what people would set for themselves, and greater numbers will exceed it, effectively setting their own (now illegal) limit.
    Interestingly, some (not all) studies show that the 15% who habitually travel faster, travel at even HIGHER speeds when a very low limit is imposed.
  9. Yes they can get your from the other side of the road. That's what they "specialise" in
    I don't beleive they have a camera.
  10. Interesting. Does that mean though that they'd have to chase you down to give you a ticket? or can they take note of your plates and send it to you later?
  11. Zackly. Not only that the percentage of people that would do a seriously dangerous speed would probably be around the 1% mark.

    Lower limits create greater speed differential of vehicle travelling in the dame direction.

  12. My wife got her licence renewal in the mail. Because she has no infringements for the last however long, the renewal is cheaper (35 bux or something)

    Its something at least.
  13. when i got busted the other week, i got a quick tour of the highway patrol car.
    i have that gift of gab thing.
    they DO have a camera, it is a video camera that records front and back and audio. however i am not sure the resolution would be good enough to recognize a number plate.
    police can issue an infringement notice if they believe in their expert opinion that you were above the speed limit. when you question a speed reading this is the angle they take in court. "if the gear is faulty, mr policeman, do you belive the defendant was above and beyond the legal speed limit in your expertly trained opinion".
    its a grey area, the law is tough to fight, best to just try and behave.
  14. If the cops can use their 'expert opinion' to deliver a conviction, why bother with expensive radar equipment in the first place? That money could then be spent more efficiently in other areas of policing.
  15. So how did the cross city tunnel end up with speed cameras in it before it opened. No cars were speeding by any amount in it then.