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.

Things the Traffic Police should enforce but dont ...

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by cjvfr, Feb 25, 2015.

  1. #1 cjvfr, Feb 25, 2015
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2015
    The Police are focused on enforcing speed limits and often other matters are ignored. Things that may be dangerous or interrupt traffic flow. What items do you think should be enforced?

    One minor one that annoys me is Hybrid or LPG stickers on number plates. I see vehicles getting around which are one of these types without stickers. Come on guys the idea was so that in an emergency you as Police and the Fire brigade could make an assessment of risk from a distance. The life you save may be your own.

    Crossing unbroken lines at intersections, they are meant to control vehicles and restrict them to staying in lane when entering the intersection. Not enforced Why?

    Lane discipline, Slow vehicle turnouts. Easy enough keep left unless you are overtaking. Lane Discipline is enforced rigidly in Europe and ignored here. Slow vehicle turn outs, no one gives a damn on these. Nothing is more frustrating than being restricted from passing by inappropriate unbroken lines only to have slow vehicles ignore turn outs and have Police ignore the situation. You role is not to entrap people into passing illegally it is to allow for an appropriate and regular traffic flow.

    Failure to indicate appropriately, indicators are not an "I have completed my turn" signal they are I am going to make a turn signal. Indicators. The rule says "give sufficient warning" that means for long enough prior to the turn. Taxi drivers are the worst at this.

    Merging, Its not hard left vehicle, right vehicle, left vehicle, right vehicle like a zipper. When merging on to a freeway accelerate to freeway speed on the on ramp don't try and merge at low speed. You disrupt flow on the freeway, the people behind you on the ramp and generally create mayhem. If you are on the freeway and in the left lane either get out into the right lanes or make gaps for people to get in.

    It is time Police stopped thinking of themselves as a one trick prostitute and more as a facilitator and educator. When people are doing something wrong then correct it, you have more than enough to do without harassing people doing 64k in a 60k zone.

    Anybody else have some pet peeves the Police ignore?
    • Agree Agree x 15
    • Like Like x 5
  2. Tailgating,applying the brakes and then the blinker before a corner.Putting a blinker on after a traffic light turns green.Sitting in the right lane next to another car 15ks under the limit.Texters.P platers who hide the P plate behind the number plate.Anyone slower than me,anyone faster than me.People who wear hats in cars.Taxis who stop in the middle of the road when there is a space out of the road lane available.Talk back jocs,all of them.Better stop now,getting cranky.
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. #3 smileedude, Feb 25, 2015
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2015
    Causing a crash should be instant suspension of license. We make it against the law to do all these things which slightly increase the risk of an accident from buckleys to buckleys. But when someone does something that actually increases the odds of a crash from buckleys to certain, I.e crashing, they get at worst maybe 3pts and a $400 fine if no ones injured. The number
    1 rule on the road should be don't crash, and all those that fail should be dealt with harshly.

    After this police should target near misses. Nearly causing an accident implys you've fairly significantly increased your risk of an accident.

    Then the police should target matters of traffic flow. These people are not dangerous but selfish.

    After this most things should be ignored entirely besides education campaigns. Fines given that don't fall in the above 3 categories do not modify behaviour. They just annoy and revenue raise.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  4. Not quite. My colleague got pinned for it once, even though ALL these other people were SPEEDING and he was DOING NOTHING WRONG.

    "How do you know they were speeding?"

    "Because they were overtaking me while I was doing the speed limit."

    I laughed, and my regard for the HWP went up a notch that day.
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. all of them?

    mobile phones... far worse than drunks, 'cos at least drunks try to drive straight :D
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. Right lane hoggers !

    Drunk/drugged/fcuking stupid morons who just shouldn't be on the road 'cod they're gonna kill someone!
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Multi vehicle i would agree. I am very anti the situation where riders who have an off with no other vehicle involved, no property damage and then find themselves with a Dangerous driving offense. There is no point that unless the rider/driver was doing something exceptionally stupid or dangerous.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  8. All those things are (in)competency offences. In Victoria especially they appear to discourage competency in case it leads to confidence and speed. Unless you're drunk or speeding it seems you can get away with them.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. I'm
    My position has changed a fair bit on this. I disagree and think an SVA on a motorcycle should be dealt with harshly. If you end up on the floor you've done something far more dangerous than even drink driving. You've crashed.

    Though there should be mitigating factors for when road condition plays a big part. It doesn't make the crashes blameless but it does share some of the responsibility.
  10. SVAs come with their own punishment, at the very least you have damaged your bike, at the most you have damaged yourself. I don't see anything to have been gained by then applying an extra punishment. What is it supposed to achieve except schadenfreude on the part of the police.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Trucks spread across every lane shit me. Limit everything over 1 tonne tare to the left lane. That'll also discourage the Toorak Tractor brigade. Same with anyone towing anything over a 7x5 trailer.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. almost no cars below 1 tonne these days... ohhh.. that' the point? :D

    you could have said 2 tonnes and point still valid :D
  13. Nah, normal sedans ok. Let's say 1.5 tonnes then. Just enough to get the big mother SUVs out of the right lane. Terrorstories, Range Rovers, Landcruisers etc.
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Yes many of those annoy me. But I don't think these issues will be fixed by police hanind out fines. Or am I being cynical?

    For instance the lack of drivers obeying the "stay left unless overtaking" is actually created by the slow speed limits. Same with tail gating.

    Texting, etc - people know it's illegal and get booked already for it, and there is huge media campaigns. But it does nothing to stop people....

    But I feel that perhaps the biggest reason for poor driving is a result of peoples perception that they are safe in their car. I'm sure most people who came to motorcycles after driving in cars where poor drivers. It's only because they realise their mortality on a bike that they become better road users.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  15. The fine system is profitable but doesn't achieve the desired outcome of better drivers. I have also felt it is disparate in punishment, a $500 fine to poor working guys with 2 kids a pregnant wife and mortgage is different to a $500 fine to Randy the Porsche driving son of an investment banker.

    How about three of these type of offenses then it is off to registered traffic school for you to do the course at your expense. A three week course two nights a week or cancellation of license, your call. Far more equitable.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  16. One of my best mates is from Italy, and of course, a philospher. We had this discussion and he was outraged at the disparity. We came to the conclusion that traffic fines should be linked to the amount of income you filed in your last tax return. It's not perfect, and implementing it would cost millions. But it would be a better system if deterent was what you are after.

    I agree with 3 offenses and off to straffic school. But not 3 offences in the same week just incase you get done by the same speed camera and don't know about the first offence before commiting the third.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. The traffic course idea is actually bloody brilliant. i would gladly support this. Assuming that you were reasonable with the 3 offences timeframe? 3 offences in 3 years is not generally that bad, however 3 offences in a month is shocking. We need to allow some margin of error, we are after all, human.
  18. Some of the incompetence iv seen on the road Police should Carry around a pair of scissors and cut up peoples licences on the spot then through it in their face
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Why would the police like to have human personality traits in our pets.
    Some crossword humor.A mate suggested instead of airbags there should be a wacking big steel spike sticking out of steering wheels,would promote a better effect.
    • Funny Funny x 2
  20. #20 smileedude, Feb 26, 2015
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2015
    I agree on the financial side of things on the penalty. The crasher has suffered enough. But the demerit side of things should be harsher than it is today. What further proof do you require that someone is a danger to themselves and others? The demerit system should not really be used as a deterrence but a mechanism to protect people from people that can't drive or ride. What's to say the bloke that was in the SVA isn't going to lose control of their bike when I'm coming the other way?

    There are some people that should not be driving or riding. Not everyone is capable of doing it safely. You can't just punish people into doing it right. But you can remove that danger from the road periodically or permanently if they show no improvement in their inability to control a vehicle.
    • Agree Agree x 2