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.

[VIC] Motorists' speeding fines could be overturned as cop takes on cameras

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Transformer, May 14, 2010.

  1. About time!
    This 3k allowance is BS when they can legally sell motorcycles that are up to 10% out.
    I know of plenty of people who've never had been booked until these 4K over limit fines started with cameras.
    Blatant revenue raising.
  2. Hoo Bloody Ray, The ADR 10% should be all they are allowed to enforce to, it makes perfect sense, legally and morally. Here's hoping it sets a precedent.
  3. Pffft, I've been stating ADR design differences were a critical factor ever since they dropped the tolerance from 10% to 3% but now that a poor widdle police man got pissed off at being done and is going to court over it, suddenly the tolerance issue is now worth being investigated.
    But not when a member of the great unwashed points out the inherent problem with speed tolerance?
  4. The Victorian Government will start pushing for modified ADR's next.

    Here's hoping he has a win and set's the precedent. Someone, somewhere was going to get seriously pissed off with this stupid 3% tolerance and challenge it, It was going to happen, It had to happen.
    I'll bet the Government was not expecting it to come from within there own Employment ranks though!
  5. The Vic tolerance isn't 3%: it's 3kph up to 100kph, then (IIRC) it becomes 3%.

    I was interested to listen to 3AW when they mentioned that the ADR 10% tolerance was changed in 2007. Prior to that vehicle manufacturers were allowed +/- 10% error, but it was then changed to read accurately or up to 10% above actual speed: no longer allowed to 'under-read'.

    Good luck to the court case, the Vic Government will spend as much of our money as they can to defend it with so much at stake. Just imagine all those vehicles registered pre-2007 that will have been booked in the zone between 3kph and 10% since the Vic Government changed the tolerance =D>
  6. Nothings changed. The government isn't investigating the tolerance issue. Many people have fought it before. It is only news this time because he is a cop. The law hasn't been changed yet. If he is succesful then it is news again, but he hasn't been yet.

    Good luck to him though.
  7. And it is a pre-1980 vehicle. I believe that there were ADR changes around 1980 that mean that even if he wins this case, it won't set a precedent for anyone accept those who also drive a pre-1980 vehicle.

    It is good that a cop is willing to take it to court, seven years after the alleged offense, but until we get a viable alternate political party who wants to change the current laws, and we vote them in, nothing will happen.
  8. Who did you complain to?
  9. Greens?

    Sex party?
  10. Don't hold your breath, this argument has been tried before and failed, so I can't see why it's likely to succeed just because it's a cop contesting it....](*,)
  11. I'd be surprised if anyone on a bike has been unfairly booked because their speedo was underreading, unless its been modified. Every bike I've owned/ridden overread! While I wish this guy good luck with the case, the real issue here is not the tolerance allowed, but the ridiculous limits that are set in the first place.
    Its human nature to push laws/restrictions as far as we can, if we know there's a 10% tolerance most of us will just ride 10% faster.
  12. This is why I believe that there IS a 10% tolerance in place, but it's now 'secret'. The 3kmh threshold is IMHO a red herring. That's why the argument fails, and why they won't back down.

    But that's not the issue, nor even the enforcement. It's the stupid, stupid limits.
  13. True. Almost every modern bike has a hero factor built into the speedo.

    Partially true.

    Only true if the road suits the higher speed, otherwise that's not true
  14. :rofl:

    Love it grue. The baseless TAC and popo PR and philosophical and ideological addiction to such a narrow part of road traffic management makes the pic seem true.
  15. About the only mildly interesting thing about this is that the Herald Sun aren't posting reader comments about this story.

    I guess it's only public outrage when it's heard, eh?
  16. I really wanted to make the whole thing white and then put on the checks and all that, but it seemed like a lot of effort for a few laughs… so I did a quick shitty one instead :angel:

    But yeah, you'd think that speeding kills more people than cancer. In retrospect I should have made the slogan be "If you don't kill yourself speeding, we will"
  17. Would you like to explain that? Perhaps I misunderstand what you mean.

    Because based on my partner's experience, and everything else reported here, the cops take 2 Km/h off the Alleged speed to allow for error in the device, and then if you are more than 3 Km/h over the limit, you get a ticket.

    That is, booked for:
    66 Km/h in a 60 zone.
    76 Km/h in a 70 zone.
    86 Km/h in a 80 zone.
    96 Km/h in a 90 zone.
    106 Km/h in a 100 zone.

    Do you think they allow more than 3 Km/h at the higher speeds?

    I know for a fact that they allow only 3 Km/h in 60 zones, and that is only 5%, not 10%.

  18. .. there is a Sex party??......or do you mean... there is a sex party??? 8-[