Attitudes to the road toll

[Grumpy John]

The following comment was made by Rob Streeper in this (http://www.woodworkforums.com/f125/dash-cam-218708#post2061368) thread

"Texas has no mandatory driver training program, you get to your 16th birthday, pass written (easy) and practical driving tests (hard to fail) and you get your license."

Got me interested, so I looked up the road toll for Texas:

426528

And Victoria:

Lives Lost - Annual - TAC - Transport Accident Commission (http://www.tac.vic.gov.au/road-safety/statistics/lives-lost-annual)

426529


3,578 deaths as against 290, even allowing for Texas having almost 5 times the population of Victoria, that is a staggering difference. Makes me wonder what, if anything, the Texas authorities are doing to curtail the road toll.

Texas 27.8 Million (est.)
Victoria 6.29 Million (ABS Sept. 2017)

[Simplicity]

One road death is too many but that is just amazing.
Actually amazingly sad.

Cheers Matt


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ian]

Probably never.
Why fuss about the road toll when your maternal mortality rate is 35.8 per 100,000 live births (in Victoria it is 8.9 per 100,000 live births) and your infant mortality rate is 5.9 per 1000 live births (in Victoria is about 3.3 per 1000 live births).

When it comes to health issues -- Texas is just backward

[Sturdee]

These lower figures in Victoria is a result of long and vigorous campaigns by the media, government and police to bring the road loss down.

I was a young driver when the campaigns started in 1969 to reduce the road loss down from 1034. The result was mandatory seat belts, .05 drink driving laws, Amphometers now radar speed guns, advertising campaigns, P plate legislation, hoons legislation and the new mandatory drink driving penalties starting next year will help even more.

Maybe someone should tell Texas what we've archived.

Peter.

[Grumpy John]

The upside of living in a "nanny state". We bitch and complain when legislation is introduced to protect us from ourselves. The trouble is, some people just don't get it, it's not cool to drive when you're drunk, or off your face. I was no saint when I was younger, but the roads are different now, so much congestion there's absolutely no room for error.

[doug3030]

I fully support the initiative to get the road toll down to zero.

The only hope they have of achieving this is to target the driving behaviors which really cause accidents like tailgating and failure to give right of way.

Currently all they target is speeding and drink driving, which, while they are a problem are the only ones really enforced because they are easy to do with speed cameras and booze buses. If the number comes up on the digital screen you are guilty and there is really little to contest.

But does it solve the problem? If speed cameras stop speeding and booze buses stop people drinking and driving then how come so many people are still caught every day? So no, it does not work but it raises a bucket-load of money for the government so no doubt it will continue.

When I learned to drive, police used to patrol the road and target all driving offences. They rarely do so now because they rely on the cameras almost exclusively. It used to be a common sight to see someone pulled over by the cops but I rarely see it any more. As a consequence nobody cares much about the little things like giving way and tailgating any more - things we all used to avoid when the police used to patrol enough to make it not worth the risk. People are now out of the good driving habits they once had, and the younger generation of drivers never had them.

I can understand some of the reasons police do not patrol. I would not like to be the one to walk up to a vehicle I had just pulled over in these days of youth gangs, shootings and violence either. But getting a speeding fine in the mail does not even begin to have the same impact as getting pulled over and having to stand on the side of the road while the cop wrote out your ticket and gave you a personal lecture while you are hoping like hell that none of your mates drive by and see you.

If they are really serious about getting the road toll down to zero they need to get police out actively patrolling AND get all the duck-heads off the road - both by making it harder to get a license in the first place and identifying those whose behavior after obtaining their licenses is not conducive with good and safe driving.

Cheers

Doug

[BobL]

400+ deaths were due to "distracted driving" ie using mobile phones.

Some zones or areas have a complete ban on cell phone use but only this year has Texas passed a statewide law prohibiting the use of texting and email, but you can still dial a number and talk and listen all you like.

The "Cell phone ordinances" make for some amusing black comedy. see https://www.txdot.gov/driver/laws/cellphones.html

[Arron]

It seems we have our own Texas. Scroll down to the graph of Australian states and territories compared
https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/international_road_safety_comparisons.aspx

[BobL]

I can understand some of the reasons police do not patrol. I would not like to be the one to walk up to a vehicle I had just pulled over in these days of youth gangs, shootings and violence either. But getting a speeding fine in the mail does not even begin to have the same impact as getting pulled over and having to stand on the side of the road while the cop wrote out your ticket and gave you a personal lecture while you are hoping like hell that none of your mates drive by and see you.

If the rates for norway and sweden are anything to go by then the quickest way to drop the road toll might be to do what the Scandinavians do regarding drink driving.
Impound and crush the vehicles - I'd like to see that with mobile phones as well - reminder: in 2010 another driver doing only 50 kph ran headlong into my vehicle and totalled both his and my vehicle while talking on a mobile,.

28% of Aus accidents involved drunk drivers (30% in the US and 3% in sweden)
https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/AlcoholCountries/background_&_intro.htm

[Grumpy John]

Give the police power to seize. Not just for hooning. If you get caught driving while disqualified, unlicensed, or driving an unregistered car it gets seized for 30 days. Doesn't matter whether it's your car, or a mates, it gets impounded and slap a $5,000 release fee on it for good luck. Giving 6 month disqualification to someone who's driving while disqualified makes no sense. This will start getting idiots off the road.

[rob streeper]

The number of deaths due to drunk driving has moderated somewhat because the legal penalties have become extraordinary. The laws here can be fierce, driving 25 mph over the limit is a felony offense with the possibility of time in prison. Enforcement is spotty at best, generally the police are reactive, not proactive.

Policing here is also very non professional. Day before yesterday there was an incident locally in which a 7 year old boy, in his residence, was shot and killed by police officers who were trying to apprehend a woman. According to reports (I say that with skepticism) the woman waved a pipe like object at the officers, they 'feared for their lives' and started blasting. This was a woman facing four male police officers, armed to the teeth with a variety of lethal and non lethal weapons, a police dog, and overwatched by a helicopter. They later killed the woman too, she wasn't carrying a gun.

Last time I looked Texas is rated #49 out of the 50 states in educational attainment, beating out only California. The United States was ranked 27th among the worlds countries in educational attainment, close to Slovenia. The local paper printed an article this week relating that San Antonio was ranked the 76th most literate city in the country. San Antonio is the 7th largest city in the country. There's a Charter School in Houston that apparently teaches students that dinosaurs and Jesus walked the earth together.

Houston, center of petrochemical money in the state and one of the major centers for that industry in the country, has had three 500 year floods since the turn of the century, the most recent was September of this year (Harvey). Climatalogists have written in their professional literature that Harvey delivered approximately three times more rain than it would have absent the effects of global warming. The Governor of the state denies that human activities are an important factor in global warming.

Texas generally and San Antonio specifically has an ongoing multiyear outbreak of various sexually transmitted diseases and diseases of poverty. Texas has the largest number of people lacking medical insurance and is home to the largest number of children living in poverty among the states.

[Grumpy John]

Rob, FYI.
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-rules/penalties/drink-driving-penalties

[rob streeper]

Rob, FYI.
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-rules/penalties/drink-driving-penalties


Seems remarkably light. I've been told that the average cost for a DUI in Texas is something like $25,000. Incarceration, bans, lockouts and so on are also used here.

[Grumpy John]

https://www.dwi-texas.com/texas-dwi-penalties/

[cava]

We have very skewed penalties in Victoria.

About a month or so ago, I was in the local Court as an observer, and was listening in on a case involving a woman who was charged with stealing from a poverty bin and also in another incident standing next to rubbish on the road verge of an insignificant back road.

The Judge, if you can call him that, was threatening to lock the woman up for 3 (three) months for littering a public highway - the alleged stealing did not get a mention. Go figure!

[elanjacobs]

"Ain't no dang nanny state gon' tell me how to not die"
- Texas

[doug3030]

Seems remarkably light. I've been told that the average cost for a DUI in Texas is something like $25,000. Incarceration, bans, lockouts and so on are also used here.

Yet people are still committing these offences every day?


But does it solve the problem? If speed cameras stop speeding and booze buses stop people drinking and driving then how come so many people are still caught every day? So no, it does not work but it raises a bucket-load of money for the government so no doubt it will continue.


Texas generally and San Antonio specifically has an ongoing multiyear outbreak of various sexually transmitted diseases and diseases of poverty. Texas has the largest number of people lacking medical insurance and is home to the largest number of children living in poverty among the states.

So if people in Texas, which is a poor state will still commit an offence which will cost them $25,000 what makes our government think drivers in Australia will respond to the smaller penalties here. Fines are clearly not a deterrent but they make heaps of money for the Governments. If they are serious about the road toll and not revenue raising then they might try something different. But alternatives like education programs cost money not make it so they won't happen.

Cheers

Doug

[PhilT2]

Texas, like many US states does not require motorcycle helmets.
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2016/01/25/repealing-motorcycle-helmet-laws-making-motorcycles-even-more-into-donorcycles/

[Chris Parks]

The road toll as pointed out above has fallen hugely but I suspect not for the reasons we generally think of such as harsher penalties and better education and let's not forget the draconian rural country road speed limits that extend journeys and increase fatigue levels. The two single biggest reasons IMHO are the incredibly safe cars we drive and the huge advances in road design and construction. I used to drive the Hume Highway when it was a two lane goat track just about all the way in cars that were nothing but death traps but at that time I only bought new cars. I don't think anyone who was not a driver in those times can appreciate how bad things were, even heaters were an optional extra. The other thing not often given credit for is the huge advances in dealing with accident victims at the scene and the modern advances in medicine, years ago people simply died because the medical care was inadequate compared to today.

Our politicians bleat on about how they have single handedly reduced the road toll using punitive methods but they conveniently forget to mention the other factors that have had at least the same effect if not more.

[rob streeper]

Texas, like many US states does not require motorcycle helmets.
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2016/01/25/repealing-motorcycle-helmet-laws-making-motorcycles-even-more-into-donorcycles/

Another nugget just came to mind: The Legislature of the Great State of Texas saw fit, in the last session, to explicitly legalize the carrying in public of spears and swords.

When in Rome...

426552

[Grumpy John]

So if people in Texas, which is a poor state will still commit an offence which will cost them $25,000 what makes our government think drivers in Australia will respond to the smaller penalties here. Fines are clearly not a deterrent but they make heaps of money for the Governments. If they are serious about the road toll and not revenue raising then they might try something different. But alternatives like education programs cost money not make it so they won't happen.

Cheers

Doug

I'm not sure about you Doug, but the thought of copping a fine for speeding keeps me to the limit, and I think the same applies to most people. The trouble is that there is an element out there that just don't care, fines mean nothing to them. These are generally the same people that don't pay their rego, drive unlicensed, and generally don't give a rats about anyone else on the road. This is where, as I mentioned earlier, seizure of the vehicle they are driving would inconvenience them more than a fine that they don't pay. It's been a while since I've seen it, but the sherrif's department used to do random roadside and carpark checks of vehicles with outstanding fines and clamp cars that were over a certain amount. I don't know what the trigger point for the clamping was, but I'm surer it was more that a couple of hundred dollars.

I'm not having a go Doug, but I don't know what the authorities are supposed to do with people who do not care about the fines. Clearly these people are so selfish that all the education programs won't help. You're right, other alternatives do cost money, things like television advertisements, police attending schools giving talks on road safety don't come cheap, and people are still speeding and drink driving. Shows like RBT and Highway Patrol show what idiots are out there, many of them are repeat offenders.

[Mr Brush]

Then you read about an accident where the innocent party was killed or badly injured, while the (unlicensed) offending driver was "known to police, having been caught driving while disqualified 8 times in the past". How is this allowed to happen? If someone gets caught even twice driving while disqualified, that's telling you they don't give a rats about other people's safety, or the law. They clearly have no intention of following the rules, and will keep on driving no matter what. Second offence driving while disqualified should be automatic impounding (and crushing) of their vehicle, plus a short jail term to get the scumbag off the streets.

[damian]

Restraining myself from having a good rant. This is a topic close to my heart and one that makes me terribly angry.

Road safety is far more complex than most of the opinions offered above. Try getting the DATA from around the developed world and doing a proper analysis.

I have never found a data set from any jurisdiction that demonstrates a link between a mass anti speeding campaign and a reduction in road trauma. In fact if you look at queensland there was an OBVIOUS stop to the downtrend in road trauma after 1998 when Beatie introduced speed cameras and sent the police out raising revenue on mass. If you look more closely there was NO drop in trauma due to speed but a demonstrable increase in trauma due to inattention.

If you look at the numbers there is limited correlation between any of the australian government "road safety" campains. RBT for example has had pretty much no impact on drunk driving incidents.

The demonstrable correlations (not necessarily causations of course but the trends are strong) are changing social trends (less boozing, less driving when fuel prices rise rapidly) and improved car design. The deployment of disc brakes and hardened passenger cells have had a tremendous impact (no pun) and to a lesser extent things like ABS. In recent years there has been a tremendous trend away from deaths but a corresponding increase in injuries. People are still crashing at the same rate but they aren't dying due mainly to hardened passenger cells and crushing front and rear zones.

The texas situation you cite has as much to do with cultural issues as regulation.

Germany is the gold standard for road safety, but it would be politically impossible to implement the strategies that have been demonstrated to work there and in similar jurisdictions. Even the driver training and regulation/compliance would be impossible let alone the billions it would cost to bring our roads up to world's best practice, instead of the dogs breakfast we have now.

Politicians don't care about results. They just want to put on a smoke a mirrors show to get re elected and keep their snouts in the trough. The police have an enforcement fixes all mentality and strong incentives not to rock the boat. The electorate keep voting for the same people, what can I say ?

Every person killed or maimed on our roads is a tragedy, for every person who cares about that victim. 10X as many people die every year on our roads as get shot. Cars are just about the most deadly thing ever created by humans. It's a pity we don't take this catastrophe seriously, but people don't want results, they just want to feel good about themselves. Same with gun laws. If people actually wanted a solution they would change their votes.

[damian]

Then you read about an accident where the innocent party was killed or badly injured, while the (unlicensed) offending driver was "known to police, having been caught driving while disqualified 8 times in the past". How is this allowed to happen? If someone gets caught even twice driving while disqualified, that's telling you they don't give a rats about other people's safety, or the law. They clearly have no intention of following the rules, and will keep on driving no matter what. Second offence driving while disqualified should be automatic impounding (and crushing) of their vehicle, plus a short jail term to get the scumbag off the streets.

Correct. There is a small minority of drivers who are vastly over represented in road trauma and serious crashes. They are invariably unlicensed and unregistered. These aren't people who have just lost their licenses, they are responsible for the killing and maiming of several people in different incidents. This is an area where strong penalties such as gaol would make a difference.

[Chris Parks]

I'm not sure about you Doug, but the thought of copping a fine for speeding keeps me to the limit, and I think the same applies to most people. The trouble is that there is an element out there that just don't care, fines mean nothing to them. These are generally the same people that don't pay their rego, drive unlicensed, and generally don't give a rats about anyone else on the road. This is where, as I mentioned earlier, seizure of the vehicle they are driving would inconvenience them more than a fine that they don't pay. It's been a while since I've seen it, but the sherrif's department used to do random roadside and carpark checks of vehicles with outstanding fines and clamp cars that were over a certain amount. I don't know what the trigger point for the clamping was, but I'm surer it was more that a couple of hundred dollars.

I'm not having a go Doug, but I don't know what the authorities are supposed to do with people who do not care about the fines. Clearly these people are so selfish that all the education programs won't help. You're right, other alternatives do cost money, things like television advertisements, police attending schools giving talks on road safety don't come cheap, and people are still speeding and drink driving. Shows like RBT and Highway Patrol show what idiots are out there, many of them are repeat offenders.

The problem with fines and other punitive measures to control speeding is that the limits are not in any way scientific with good basis but someone pulled the number out of a hat and decided that the number was good for that piece of road. I have witnessed close to my home roads that had high accident rates due to a limit that was way too high have millions spent on improvements and THEN they reduced the speed limits when it was not necessary after the roads were clearly able to support the original limits.

The other issue is the one Victoria has encountered and that is they have to keep reducing the tolerance the enforcement authorities allow before imposing a punishment to the driver. The reason this becomes necessary is that the revenue drops off as drivers change their driving habits to avoid being punished and the authorities have become used to the cash flow that was being generated. In the end and it will happen the cash flow will dry up so they invent other methods to lift it again. In NSW this has not become a problem as the authorities have a wide tolerance, the limits are not widely abused and the whole system seems to work well.

The biggest problem I have with the system is that politicians will not admit that their punitive approach is only part of the reason the toll has dropped and in the end it is I would guess less than 50% of the overall reason but we will never hear those that support the punitive approach ever admit that. I am willing to bet that no politician will ever fund a study to see what the influences have been as they would then have to admit their approach is not the total answer and only a minor part of it and all their rhetoric is a sham.

There is a bottom limit to how far the road toll can be reduced due to the human element and the only fix for that is autonomous cars not driven by humans. When that happens and it will happen the toll will reduce further but funnily enough the cash flow from punishing drivers will take a huge hit and I wonder what the pollies will do then. In their usual fashion they will panic and invent some other way of generating the lost revenue because Leopards don't change their spots.

The above mainly centres around speeding but other offences do happen mainly drink driving which is dealt with too lightly in my view. I think the first offence should be six months jail with no appeal possible and let's see what happens then. There is now a proposal to lighten the punishment instead of increasing it being looked at and I shake my head at the pollies approach to the road toll all over again.

Plan to keep drunk motorists from facing court (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/plan-to-keep-drunk-motorists-from-facing-court-20171223-h09o3a.html)

[Bohdan]

For our pollies jail is not an option as it costs money and generates no revenue. The jails are already overfull and judges are "instructed" to not sentence even repeat offenders.

[Handyjack]

Probably one of the biggest problems now being seen is drivers effected by drugs.
Some of the worst drivers will not have a licence to loose, and not be driving a vehichle owned by them, it might even be stolen.
Some driver's just do not care if the kill and maim others and the justice system is too soft.

Here in Victoria this year we have had two drivers wilfully mow down pedestrians. Both were probably drug effected and time will tell if they are even tried. Neither owned the vehicle they were driving, one was stolen from a neighbour, the other belonged to a relative.

So what is the solution for those who do not care? I do not know. Impounding or destroying the vehicle will not work because it is not theirs and they probably have few if any assest to seize.

[Chris Parks]

For our pollies jail is not an option as it costs money and generates no revenue. The jails are already overfull and judges are "instructed" to not sentence even repeat offenders.

Yep, pollies like the money. It might save a few lives though, ask someone who has had a relative or partner killed due to someone driving under the influence what they think.

[woodPixel]

Do we not live in a democracy?

Perhaps we need to ensure the will of the people is heard, not the will of magistrates and politicians. After all, are they not on our payroll? (They certainly are on those of corporations).

If the population says a thing is to be be done, it must be done. If we force a digital one-to-one weekly compulsory voting system on pretty much every issue of substance (yay/nay) then it doesn't matter what a party thinks or a certain politician thinks. They are simply the drones ensuring the will of the people is enforced.

Imagine the response if politicians were responsible for the actions of their electorates?

Really responsible. Theft, violence, mayhem, incivility and anti-social behaviour?

Personally I think we are too soft on punishments. There needs only to be one result for serious crime.

[Grumpy John]

So what is the solution for those who do not care? I do not know. Impounding or destroying the vehicle will not work because it is not theirs and they probably have few if any assest to seize.

True, not much can be done if the car is stolen, but friends will stop lending cars if they are going to be impounded. I don't really like the idea of crushing a usable vehicle, I believe it should be sold to pay for any fines/costs.

[rob streeper]

426625426624

[doug3030]

I'm not having a go Doug, but I don't know what the authorities are supposed to do with people who do not care about the fines. Clearly these people are so selfish that all the education programs won't help. You're right, other alternatives do cost money, things like television advertisements, police attending schools giving talks on road safety don't come cheap, and people are still speeding and drink driving. Shows like RBT and Highway Patrol show what idiots are out there, many of them are repeat offenders.

John, I did not think for aminute you were having a go at me or anyone else. In fact it seems to me that you and I are pretty much in agreement that the current tactics being used are ineffective at anything but revenue raising.


I'm not sure about you Doug, but the thought of copping a fine for speeding keeps me to the limit, and I think the same applies to most people. The trouble is that there is an element out there that just don't care, fines mean nothing to them. These are generally the same people that don't pay their rego, drive unlicensed, and generally don't give a rats about anyone else on the road.

The thought of the fines keeps me within the limits too John. When I am out on the highways I have my GPS navigation up for an accurate speed reading since you cannot trust the car's speedo. I drive with cruise control on and the speed set to right on or just under the speed limit by the GPS. Yet twice in the last 12 months I have been caught by speed cameras when I know that I have not been over the limit - let alone the 3 km/h leeway you are allowed before being booked. These were both speed cameras which I was well aware of the location of. My old (8+ years) GPS did not have dashcam and trip recording, which is why I recently upgraded as I discussed in this thread http://www.woodworkforums.com/f125/dash-cam-218708. Next time I get booked I will have the proof I need. Speed cameras are not as infallible as most people think and most people pay up because they cannot prove otherwise. So yes I attempt to avoid the fines but I have been caught doing nothing wrong. The next ticket I get will be contested and the dash cam will have paid for itself.

Did you know that the Australian Standard allows for the speedo to read high by up to 10% plus 4 km/h? That means your speedo can show that you are doing 100 km/h when you are actually doing only 86 km/h? Think about that next time you see someone in the right hand lane doing 90 km/h in a 100 zone. :rolleyes: It is the standards allowing great descrepancies like that that get the other drivers frustrated and the driver causing the frustration cannot work out why all the others are driving past them and bipping their horns in annoyance.

Cheeers

Doug

[elanjacobs]

Did you know that the Australian Standard allows for the speedo to read high by up to 10% plus 4 km/h? That means your speedo can show that you are doing 100 km/h when you are actually doing only 86 km/h? Think about that next time you see someone in the right hand lane doing 90 km/h in a 100 zone. :rolleyes: It is the standards allowing great descrepancies like that that get the other drivers frustrated and the driver causing the frustration cannot work out why all the others are driving past them and bipping their horns in annoyance.

Cheeers

Doug
I had my speedo re-calibrated by an auto electrician after I noticed it was reading significantly higher than my actual speed. It cost a few hundred, but I know it's accurate now.

[Chris Parks]

The speedometer by LAW MUST READ FAST, it is not an option for manufacturers to have a speedo that is dead accurate as they must abide by the law and the tolerance limits built into the legislation. Having it calibrated to read accurately is in fact in breach of the legislation if taken to the enth degree. Manufacturers these days could supply the vehicle with an absolutely accurate speedo but they are simply not allowed to do that. I used a couple of GPS's to work out how far mine was out and the reason I used a few was because GPS has resolution issues depending on the number of satellites it has locked on to at the time. When we first started using GPS for racing we had a lot of problems then when they were solved we found it ALWAYS lagged against the physical sensors we ran it parallel with. GPS is not god and I would not rely on it to present any court case. Some cars these days are logging data on a loop and continually writing to memory and if your car has this facility and you want to argue the point hand the keys to the officer and arrange to have it impounded for data analysis but that would be an extreme reaction to a speeding fine. I would like to see the copper's face if someone did it though, I reckon it would be awesome to see his reaction when he realises all the implications of what he has been presented with.

[elanjacobs]

The speedometer by LAW MUST READ FAST, it is not an option for manufacturers to have a speedo that is dead accurate as they must abide by the law and the tolerance limits built into the legislation. Having it calibrated to read accurately is in fact in breach of the legislation if taken to the enth degree.
https://www.racq.com.au/cars-and-driving/safety-on-the-road/driving-safely/speedo-accuracy

The only requirement in Australia is that it must not read less than the actual speed (or over by more than 10% +4km), if you can get it dead on it's still legal.

As for GPS, we mere mortals don't get the full resolution available; that's reserved for the military only.

[BobL]

I used a couple of GPS's to work out how far mine was out and the reason I used a few was because GPS has resolution issues depending on the number of satellites it has locked on to at the time. .

It's not just the number but the positions of the satellites as well - if the satellites being used by a GPS are too close together the accuracy won't be as good as as if they are spread out. GPS is also terrain, and building and vegetation limited and makes a whole lot of assumptions based on previous speeds when a satellite or 2 drop out or are temporarily lost - eg watch the speed shown by a GPS as your car goes into a tunnel. On a flat open straight road with no obstructions I have seen claims of around +/- 1kph, but to win a court case you would probably have to provide a recent calibration speed cert for your GPS and then it I still doubt any magistrate is going to err on the side of a motorist and their $200 GPS.

[Sturdee]

Whilst speed is a major aspect the other is drink driving.

I hope that the new Victorian laws to deal with this will have a great effect in reducing the road deaths.

In brief early next year anyone, including 1st offenders, caught with a blood alcohol level of 0.05 or more ( P plates zero level) will have a mandatory immediate minimum period of licence cancellation as well as a minimum 6 month interlock device requirement.

This is as well as what the magistrate will impose.

Surely that will be effective.

Peter.

[doug3030]

Surely that will be effective.

I really would like it to be effective but in reality I doubt it will make a shred of difference. Texans are still drink driving at an average cost of $25000 per offence.

[Chris Parks]

https://www.racq.com.au/cars-and-driving/safety-on-the-road/driving-safely/speedo-accuracy

The only requirement in Australia is that it must not read less than the actual speed (or over by more than 10% +4km), if you can get it dead on it's still legal.

As for GPS, we mere mortals don't get the full resolution available; that's reserved for the military only.

That is not the way I read but the ADR's must have changed as I recall being in meetings that specified it must read fast and never slow but this is what the actual ADR says

>18.5.1.1.2. indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40 km/h, to an accuracy of ± 10 percent

It in fact does not specify it cannot read slow which surprises me. From Here...https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2007C00025/e85eded2-4440-426d-b3d0-cec060612097

To me that says it must read within 10% and no specification on under or over.

[Grumpy John]

When I fitted larger tyres to my 100 series Landcruiser the speedo went from being spot on at 100 K/Hr (according to 2 of my GPS units) to showing 95 at 100K. I was considering getting one of these (https://www.marks4wd.com/speedo-correction/mfksgi-5e.html) fitted, but decided to keep using the GPS. The combination of GPS and cruise control have probably saved me a few fines in the past. Modern cars are so smooth and quiet that it's not hard to find yourself doing over the limit without realiising it.
While I don't disagree with people claiming the fines for speeding are arbitrary and revenue raising, it is not practical to have different speeds for every road condition there is. The speed limit is just that, a limit for that particular road, or stretch of road. you are under no obligation to do that speed, although driving too slow can be just, if not more dangerous, as driving too fast.
One of my pet hates when driving on the freeway, or multi-lane highways is people who cannot stick to one lane (preferably the left) or one speed.

426640

[Sturdee]

I really would like it to be effective but in reality I doubt it will make a shred of difference. Texans are still drink driving at an average cost of $25000 per offence.

Maybe, but having an interlock device is much more restrictive than a fine. Firstly the device must be fitted to your car prior to going to Vic Roads to gain a new licence (as the old is cancelled) and then regularly blowing into the device before it can start and then at regular intervals to keep the motor going.

Monthly reports are to be sent to Vic Roads verifying that you have not attempted to drive whilst having alcohol in your system and complying with the conditions imposed on your new licence.

It's a very restrictive way of driving, much worse then paying fines. We will know soon of the effect as the new legislation was passed by parliament this month and the bill received royal assent only last week. If not the government will get even tougher as they are determined to reduce the road deaths.

Peter.

[DavidG]

Adr 18-03

5.3. The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle. At the testspeeds specified in paragraph 5.2.5. Above, there shall be the following relationshipbetween the speed displayed (v1 ) and the true speed (v2).0 ≤ (v1 - v2) ≤ 0.1 v2 + 4 km/h

[jimfish]

Maybe, but having an interlock device is much more restrictive than a fine. Firstly the device must be fitted to your car prior to going to Vic Roads to gain a new licence (as the old is cancelled) and then regularly blowing into the device before it can start and then at regular intervals to keep the motor going.

Monthly reports are to be sent to Vic Roads verifying that you have not attempted to drive whilst having alcohol in your system and complying with the conditions imposed on your new licence.

It's a very restrictive way of driving, much worse then paying fines. We will know soon of the effect as the new legislation was passed by parliament this month and the bill received royal assent only last week. If not the government will get even tougher as they are determined to reduce the road deaths.

Peter.

This only works if the offender applies for a new license. I have a daughter that works in the courts system and many people come back 6 months after the license cancellation to apply for a new license having never had an interlock fitted. These are expensive to have fitted and most offenders from the lower socioeconomic areas don’t have the funds to fit and maintain the devices so continue to drive with no license.

[woodPixel]

WRT spedo's, surely the diameter of your tyres changes the speed quite a bit?

e.g. My car comes standard with 60 series tyres, but I always fit 40's. (They sure a harder ride!)... the diameter change on an 18" rim would be substantial.

Additionally, if you have your speedo calibrated for new tyres, as they wear you'll be reading quite a bit faster. If a tyre can wear 5 or 6mm before being changed....

[woodPixel]

This only works if the offender applies for a new license. I have a daughter that works in the courts system and many people come back 6 months after the license cancellation to apply for a new license having never had an interlock fitted. These are expensive to have fitted and most offenders from the lower socioeconomic areas don’t have the funds to fit and maintain the devices so continue to drive with no license.

As with all things, punishments are disproportionately punitive to the poor.

Finland has an interesting approach: A sliding scale proportional to income: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland-home-of-the-103000-speeding-ticket/387484/

[elanjacobs]

WRT spedo's, surely the diameter of your tyres changes the speed quite a bit?

e.g. My car comes standard with 60 series tyres, but I always fit 40's. (They sure a harder ride!)... the diameter change on an 18" rim would be substantial.

Additionally, if you have your speedo calibrated for new tyres, as they wear you'll be reading quite a bit faster. If a tyre can wear 5 or 6mm before being changed....
Generally you'd change the rims and tyres together to keep the overall size within a few % of OEM. If you're only changing tyres there would be a significant change. On a 245/40R17, 6mm of wear changes the circumference by about 2%, which should still be well within tolerance

[Grumpy John]

As with all things, punishments are disproportionately punitive to the poor.

Finland has an interesting approach: A sliding scale proportional to income: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland-home-of-the-103000-speeding-ticket/387484/

Boo hoo, someone offends enough times to warrant an interlock being fitted to their car gets no sympathy from me.

[doug3030]

Additionally, if you have your speedo calibrated for new tyres, as they wear you'll be reading quite a bit faster. If a tyre can wear 5 or 6mm before being changed....

Supposing your tyres when brand new have a diameter of 700mm (mine are 2 weeks old and approximately that) then the circumference of the tyre is 2,199mm. If that wears down 6 mm then the diameter becomes 688mm because it wears 6mm on both ends of the tape when you measure the diameter, giving a circumference of 2,161mm. 2161/2199 * 100 = 98% so the speedo reading changes by 2% over the life of the tyre in that example.

Now for a smaller car with say 500mm new tyre diameter then the new circumference is 1570mm and the worn circumference is 1533 or a 3% change in the speedo reading for a given speed over the life of the tyre. Tyres bigger than 700mm will obviously have a change of less than 2%.

Different profiles of tyres which can be fitted to a vehicle would potentially have a far bigger impact on the speedo reading than whether the tyre is new or worn.

What I like about the speedo on the GPS is that it doesn't care what the tyres look like.

[ian]

WRT spedo's, surely the diameter of your tyres changes the speed quite a bit?

e.g. My car comes standard with 60 series tyres, but I always fit 40's. (They sure a harder ride!)... the diameter change on an 18" rim would be substantial.
I think you might find that this is not a legal modification. AFAIR, if the tire/rim combination fitted is not listed on the tire pressure plate, the vehicle can be defected (declared unroadworthy) on the spot.

It would pay to check.

[doug3030]

As with all things, punishments are disproportionately punitive to the poor.

Finland has an interesting approach: A sliding scale proportional to income: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland-home-of-the-103000-speeding-ticket/387484/

Well in that case, when the speed camera fine turns up in the post, I can always tell them that my useless dole bludging son-in-law was driving my car at the time. He has next to no income so the fine would be minimal. I could slip him a couple of hundred to take the rap and still be heaps in front.

Cheeers

Doug

[John Saxton]

Seems like Texas must be a place to use alternative transport other than driving yourself ,something we are considering ( driving) across some of the Southern States soon.
Always concerns me of the traffic coming towards me with folk still cannot get it out of their heads that mobile use, or inattention not only compromises their safety but also other folk trying to get somewhere.

[rob streeper]

Seems like Texas must be a place to use alternative transport other than driving yourself ,something we are considering ( driving) across some of the Southern States soon.
Always concerns me of the traffic coming towards me with folk still cannot get it out of their heads that mobile use, or inattention not only compromises their safety but also other folk trying to get somewhere.
You must drive to survive here, i.e. think like a motorcyclist, always be on the lookout, never assume that the other drivers can see you, never assume that others will behave in a logical, reasonable or rational way and stay as far away as possible from other road users.

Another big issue locally is road debris. There's an extremely large informal handyman workforce here due to lax employment laws and consequent minimal job security that has given rise to an army of individual fixer-upper types that load all manner of kit onto any and every available type of four wheeled motorized vehicle, often with no load restraints. Thus there is a huge amount of stuff dropped on the roads. I've seen and sometimes had to swerve to avoid everything from ladders to mattresses. Particularly dangerous are the ladders, I've seen at least several hundred on the highways in my years here. There've been some notable incidents where occupants of vehicles have been killed or seriously injured by construction related road debris but drunks are still the most serious hazard. If at all possible I try to get off of the road by 9 in the evening.

[doug3030]

You must drive to survive here, i.e. think like a motorcyclist, always be on the lookout, never assume that the other drivers can see you, never assume that others will behave in a logical, reasonable or rational way and stay as far away as possible from other road users.

So a lot easier than surviving on the roads in Melbourne then.

[DiRob]

I agree the above would not only give the police more respect I challenge any driver to get out and about and not have incidences talk about road rage.

[beefy]

I think I'm going to be hated by many Australians after what I have to say, but what the hell, I can only say it as I've experienced it.

I've been here for 20 years, coming from Europe, and sorry to say a lot of the driving thinking / mentality here is very disappointing.

Way way too many people following blindly instead of THINKING for themselves. And they follow stupid and/or dangerous driving habits without THINKING why they are doing so. Take turning right at a roundabout for instance. In my 20 years I have not noticed anyone indicating correctly to turn right at a roundabout. They do things the lazy way of just leaving their right indicator on for the duration of the turn. This means other drivers waiting to come onto the roundabout think the car is still turning right so they wait, only to find the car turns off at that exit. Where is the changing of the indicator to the left one to tell other drivers they are exiting the roundabout. I've just done my truck test and we are still being taught to correctly indicate at roundabout, yet why does hardly anyone do it.
Now here's where the thinking bit comes in !! Nearly all drivers must have been the victim of this laziness/stupidity, and you would think it would remind them that they themselves should indicate correctly at a roundabout when turning right. Unfortunately that's not what I've observed and it seems the blind follow the blind and keep on doing this dumb act. Now are they dumb or do they simply not care, and just can't be arsed ???

Like I say, many people might hate me after this but I'm only telling what I've seen continuously for 20 years.

Merging !! Holy crap this one gets me and is a clear embarrassing example of how many drivers do not THINK. Once again we are taught how to merge correctly, yet once many people have their license they do not think and they just blindly follow what many dumb drivers do. In their infinite wisdom they somehow think merging at 80 ks into traffic doing 90-100 is the way to do it (cough, gag). They just keep at that dumb speed and don't do any pre-emptive driving to get themselves in a position where there's a gap in the traffic. They don't look over their shoulder but just look in their wing mirror instead. I've talked to many drivers who are under the mistaken impression that the drivers on the freeway are supposed to give way. I've had a few drivers honking at me because I refused to give way (i.e. I'm on the freeway) when I've had over 100m ahead and behind of me, yet the stupid merging driver has it in his limited grey matter that he must do nothing except drive at his fixed set pace in the merging lane, staying right at my side, and the freeway traffic will just get out of the road. Once again where do the huge quantity of drivers that do this get it from. They were not taught this so obviously it's another case of the blind following the blind without THINKING why. Every time I go onto a merging ramp, my first thing is to get up to the same speed as the freeway traffic, then find an open spot to merge into, and position myself to get into it. Problem is most time I can't get above 80 Ks because the driver(s) in front of me have accelerated to 80 then just stay at that speed. It's infuriating when other dumb arses won't allow you to drive safely and correctly.
Notice something else with merging that happens regular as clockwork. The merging cars become a "connected" road train, making zipping onto the freeway traffic very chaotic. I do the opposite and deliberately leave a gap in front of me when I'm in the merging lane. This allows me to accelerate forward or drop back to move into a gap. Of course what happens when you leave a gap like this in front of you ??? You get tailgated because the dumb sod behind you only knows about driving up the of the vehicle in front and if you aren't doing that then you are just holding up traffic. They obviously can't work it out that although you have a gap in front of you, you're actually doing the same speed as the vehicle in front of you.

Look at overtaking. Where I come from, when overtaking, the driver generally pulls out a good distance behind then after overtaking, pulls back in a good distance ahead. The culture here seems to be to stupidly and needlessly drive up close to the vehicle you're overtaking, pull out and overtake, then pull back in way to close. Where did this come from, was it taught, or is it just another case of people not thinking, and blindly following stupid and dangerous driving "techniques". It even happens on empty freeways (a trip to Canberra we did). Several times my wife got worked up when yet another overtaking driver approaching from kms behind us has to come right up our backside before pulling out to overtake.

Tailgaiting - this one has to be the holy grail here. You are not allowed to slow down before a turn. You are not allowed to keep to the speed limit, especially when overtaking and a pratt behind you wants you to go an extra 10 ks or so faster, etc, etc. Tailgating seems to be like a national sport here, and is indicative of the aggressive, confrontational mentality of way to many people here.

Cutting off - another very common dangerous driving act, and one that's cause me to slam the anchors on many times.

Lane hogging on freeways - wow, back home drivers would go nuts at this, it is just completely unacceptable there. Here, I regularly come across drivers sitting in the overtaking lanes and they won't budge. I've came behind them and flashed my lights and even honked my horn because I'm stuck and can't overtake anywhere. Still, they just sit there blocking the lane, it's just pure arrogance.

Lane changing - the infamous move THEN indicate, or at best put the indicator on at the same time as they commence the move to pull in front of you (dangerously close of course, as usual) and cut you off. To add insult to injury you often only see a flash or two of the indicator. Yet another case of the blind following the blind, and doing the same stupid dangerous acts. They obviously don't realise that if they were captured on a cam, their indicating means nothing because it's something like 4 seconds or 4 indicator flashed must have occurred before the vehicle move occurs. The driving rules also state that the indicator must remain on until the move has completed.

Chaotic lack of driving structure - the amount of times I've seen close calls because of the free-for-all lane changing on freeways. You've got a car in the middle lane then the 2 other cars overtake on either side and both of them try to pull over to the middle lane at the same time. Absolutely no structure of stay in the left most lane unless overtaking, and get back in the left most lane immediately after overtaking. And everyone must have seen the general hoon like driving in peak hour, where they act like they're on a race track and are darting through narrow gaps from lane to lane.

Friday after work fever in peak hour - obviously some alcohol and parties to rush home for and kill someone on the way there.

Pushing in to get one single car space further. We all know how many greedy drivers there are, pushing in where 2 lanes merge, and taking advantage of the ruling that if my vehicle is ahead of your vehicle, you must let me in. Of course they raced up and the merging lanes have almost became one, and you had to slam your anchors on to "let" him in. While on that matter, in conversation I've also noticed many drivers think they have right of way when their vehicle is in front of the other, even when the merging lanes are separated by broken lines.

Crook like government that does stuff-all about the real issues that have been happening forever, but will fine for going a tad over the speed limit. Put this and everything else together and you have a great recipe.

Another thing I've noticed is how many Australians love to blame the Asians for the wreckless driving here. My personal observations are the aggressiveness comes from whites of ALL ages. I know because I make it a point to always observe the driver. But perhaps all those whites are immigrants too, as I had one Australian said to me. I will admit that I've noticed a few Asians drive as though they are not aware there are any other drivers on the road, and they'll do something quite dangerous and infuriating, and seem shocked when the victim driver gets angry with them. But they aren't aggressive and confrontational like too many of the whites.

I think we have anger issues here too. I recently came across a thread talking about "angry aggressive Australians". It created a lot of posts and the thing I noticed is how a lot of the respondents were blaming the government for them getting angry. It's almost as though they were justifying their behaviour towards others. That's really going to solve a lot of problems.

Until the large quantity of drivers who drive as mentioned above, start to care, and THINK and change their attitude, I believe we'll continue to have too many accidents. The other problem is way too many people don't seem to notice what I've talked about, and therefore don't perceive it as an issue. Is it because they are born into this chaos and thus don't realise how bad it is. Coming from a country where I consider the driving vastly better and more organised, I see all the above like I see and feel a brick hitting me in the face.

I think we need to admit we have a cultural problem here. Not even being aware of the real problems, not caring, not thinking, following dangerous driving practises blindly, anger, aggression, blaming immigrants. Our government don't care and only want to rip us off so the only solution is we all need to care and voice out about this in general conversation, putting political correctness aside.

Let the attacks begin. Now waiting for typical reply of, "F-off back to your own country", etc.

[Kuffy]

a lot of the driving thinking / mentality here is very disappointing.




I've came behind them and flashed my lights and even honked my horn because I'm stuck and can't overtake anywhere. Still, they just sit there blocking the lane, it's just pure arrogance.




I think we have anger issues here too. I recently came across a thread talking about "angry aggressive Australians".
[/QUOTE]

enough said.

[rob streeper]

Wow Beefy, if you think Australians are aggressive you never want to drive in Texas as you'd likely blow a couple of o-rings.

[Mr Brush]

Most of the above post (beefy) should be termed "common sense", but unfortunately that phrase became an oxymoron a few years ago, and has fallen into disuse.

Look, since many drivers here can't even KEEP LEFT on the freeway, there's no chance of changing some of the more ridiculous habits (merging, roundabouts, tailgating, etc.). Presumably they are either (a) too stupid to understand simple instructions posted on huge signposts, or (b) so ignorant that they think the rules only apply to other people, and not to themselves. These people are indeed "special", just not in a good way.....:rolleyes:

I'll add another one which is prevalent in our area; people turning right off a main road onto a side road, who just stop in the middle of their lane until a gap appears in oncoming traffic. This causes traffic to bank up behind them, whereas if they had positioned their car as far to the right of their lane as possible, other traffic would have been able to continue past them on the left. In our area we have the additional problem that drivers won't attempt to drive through a gap unless it is at least twice the width of their own car.... :D

Oh, I nearly forgot about "duelling trucks" on the freeway, i.e. one truck travelling at 110.01 km/h trying to pass another truck doing 110.00 km/h. This can completely block a 2 lane freeway for many, many kilometers.

[doug3030]

Look at overtaking. Where I come from, when overtaking, the driver generally pulls out a good distance behind then after overtaking, pulls back in a good distance ahead. The culture here seems to be to stupidly and needlessly drive up close to the vehicle you're overtaking, pull out and overtake, then pull back in way to close. Where did this come from, was it taught, or is it just another case of people not thinking, and blindly following stupid and dangerous driving "techniques".

Ever see those signs on the highways that say "Keep Left Unless Overtaking"? That's why they don't pull out until the last minute and then cut in a couple of metres in front of you. Its the only law or sign that they obey to the letter and it was not meant to be read that way.


Chaotic lack of driving structure - the amount of times I've seen close calls because of the free-for-all lane changing on freeways. You've got a car in the middle lane then the 2 other cars overtake on either side and both of them try to pull over to the middle lane at the same time. Absolutely no structure of stay in the left most lane unless overtaking and get back in the left most lane immediately after overtaking. And everyone must have seen the general hoon like driving in peak hour, where they act like they're on a race track and are darting through narrow gaps from lane to lane.

So - which way do you want it?

Beefy, I agree with most of what you said.

CHeers

Doug

[woodPixel]

Beefy, should you drive in Canberra you would completely blow all 16 gaskets.

This place is the absolute bees-knees of incompetence, ignorance, unthinking, tailgating, non-blinker-use, non-merging, speeding, puttering, red light running, dull-minded bumblers, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement and entitlement.

As a Sydney driver, coming here was simply the most incredible experience I've ever had.

It's another world, entirely.

[doug3030]

Beefy, should you drive in Canberra you would completely blow all 16 gaskets.

This place is the absolute bees-knees of incompetence, ignorance, unthinking, tailgating, non-blinker-use, non-merging, speeding, puttering, red light running, dull-minded bumblers, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement and entitlement.

You should have been there 25 years ago - Its a pleasure driving in Canberra now. I much prefer it to Melbourne.

[beefy]

Beefy, should you drive in Canberra you would completely blow all 16 gaskets.

This place is the absolute bees-knees of incompetence, ignorance, unthinking, tailgating, non-blinker-use, non-merging, speeding, puttering, red light running, dull-minded bumblers, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement and entitlement.

As a Sydney driver, coming here was simply the most incredible experience I've ever had.

It's another world, entirely.

I don't think that's possible. All gaskets were blown a long time ago LOL.

You know what, it's very interesting about Sydney vs Melbourne as far as aggressiveness goes. My first few years were in Sydney and I never noticed the level of aggressiveness there that I did when I came to Melbourne. While in Sydney I knew a guy from Melbourne and he called Melbourne the land of the fast drivers. I never knew what he meant until I arrived here. Ha ha, "fast" is not the word I'd use to describe it. My first day on the roads here and I was in shock at the way I was getting cut off all the time.

Funny thing is when Melbournians go to Sydney, they think Sydney is bad. Maybe things have got worse there, don't know. I was an import without bias to either city, yet I've found Melbourne is atrocious and Sydney wasn't as bad by far. Maybe Sydney drivers have been used to a more congested and less organised/planned (zillions of one-ways, as the crow fly roads, etc) roads for a long time, and they've learned to just deal with it and not go crazy. I remember being in Sydney at 7.00 pm after work, stuck at a traffic light for 15 mins. Coming to Melbourne and the roads were much less congested yet so many drivers were incredibly aggressive.

[doug3030]

I don't think that's possible. All gaskets were blown a long time ago LOL.

You know what, it's very interesting about Sydney vs Melbourne as far as aggressiveness goes. My first few years were in Sydney and I never noticed the level of aggressiveness there that I did when I came to Melbourne.

I have been in Melbourne for over eight years now. When I drive outside of Melbourne - even to the close-by cities like Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo, I have to keep reminding myself not to drive so aggressively. You need to drive aggressivley in Melbourne or you won't stand a chance.

Sydney is not so bad. Brisbane is casual and relaxed like a big country town by comparison to Melbourne. Adelaide is probably worse than Sydney but no where near as bad as Melbourne. I have driven in some of the largest cities in Asia and it is only in Melbourne that I feel as if I am taking my life into my own hands just by getting behind the wheel.

Cheers

Doug

[Sturdee]

Whilst I agree with Beefy about some driver attitudes, especially tailgating, I disagree with others.

In regard to freeway on ramps, the ones in my area are signposted as 80 k hence you must merge at that speed until you are on the freeway when it becomes 100 k. Don't blame drivers for obeying the law blame the law.

Lane hogging on freeways is another point, each lane is legally a separate road, so you don't need and often are not able to drive on the left lanes. Overtaking lanes are usually only on highways and only if so signposted.

Indicating on roundabouts is fine if it is a decent roundabout but with most roundabouts in the suburbs being only 1 or 2 metres in diameter I leave the indicator on. I fail to see any problems with that as only one car can be on such roundabouts at any time.

Peter.

[beefy]

Whilst I agree with Beefy about some driver attitudes, especially tailgating, I disagree with others.

In regard to freeway on ramps, the ones in my area are signposted as 80 k hence you must merge at that speed until you are on the freeway when it becomes 100 k. Don't blame drivers for obeying the law blame the law.

Lane hogging on freeways is another point, each lane is legally a separate road, so you don't need and often are not able to drive on the left lanes. Overtaking lanes are usually only on highways and only if so signposted.

Indicating on roundabouts is fine if it is a decent roundabout but with most roundabouts in the suburbs being only 1 or 2 metres in diameter I leave the indicator on. I fail to see any problems with that as only one car can be on such roundabouts at any time.

Peter.

Fair enough, but you seem to be looking for the exceptions rather than the general stuff.

I don't expect people to break the law if the merging speed states a max of 80, and haven't said they should so you can't disagree with a statement I haven't made. I completely agree with you that the law needs changing in those cases. Forcing a merging speed of 80 onto a road with a speed limit of 100 is just typical of the stupidity we can get from our government. It's also in disagreement with the Victorian Road Rules book which tells you to accelerate to the same speed as the traffic you'll be merging with.

Maybe I'm using the wrong words and mean highway when I said freeway. I associate the word freeway with motorway, highway, etc so apologises if I'm using incorrect terms. But in general I'm talking about highways where we are supposed to keep left unless overtaking.

Fair call on tiny little roundabouts in built up housing areas, etc, but I'm talking about roundabouts in general which are normally bigger than that and leave plenty time/distance to change indicators and thus inform other road users. Like I say I have NEVER noticed anyone changing their indicator from right to left during a right turn to signal their intention that they will be leaving the roundabout at the next exit.

For everything I've said, if you look hard enough you'll easily be able to find exceptions to counteract what I've said. But generally speaking I hold to what I've said.

[Sawdust Maker]

Beefy, should you drive in Canberra you would completely blow all 16 gaskets.

This place is the absolute bees-knees of incompetence, ignorance, unthinking, tailgating, non-blinker-use, non-merging, speeding, puttering, red light running, dull-minded bumblers, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement, entitlement and entitlement.

As a Sydney driver, coming here was simply the most incredible experience I've ever had.

It's another world, entirely.


Is Chatswood a suburb of Canberra?

[elanjacobs]

Most people treat suburban roundabouts as normal intersections. I'll only indicate left to exit from freeway roundabouts or ones with weird street angles

[doug3030]

Most people treat suburban roundabouts as normal intersections. I'll only indicate left to exit from freeway roundabouts or ones with weird street angles

Freeway roundabouts? They must all be in the eastern suburbs. Another good reason not to cross the bridge. :rolleyes:

[elanjacobs]

Freeway roundabouts? They must all be in the eastern suburbs. Another good reason not to cross the bridge. :rolleyes:
Highway. My bad...

[woodPixel]

Is Chatswood a suburb of Canberra?

:) Chatswood is an exception. There, the incompetence is catastrophic. I've seen people run over, people walk directly in front of cars, cars going into shop windows and even a couple of fights. I used to live in Neutral Bay and Mosman for 20 years and visited most weekends for shopping.

One thing with Sydney is, although people are fast and its very busy, but so is everyone. When you need to pull into the traffic from an off-street you are let in (NOT Canberra), if you need to merge you zipper together (NOT Canberra) and if you make a mistake you can quickly rectify without agro (NOT Canberra). Other abominable behaviours here are: people actively accelerate if you indicate to move into their lane to deliberately block you off; they utterly refuse to cooperate at on-ramps (they accelerate to match your velocity to force you behind them), they indicate WHEN they turn or move lanes (not before) and go through blatantly red lights at literally every intersection (I absolutely kid you not).

Here, if you are in a small car you are actively hassled. I see it first hand... I drive my black HSV and no one gives me stick, if I drive my MIL's little blue Mazda they are up my butt , pushing in and won't give way.

Sydney was rushed, but nobody was belligerent. There may have been rudeness borne of frustration, but in Canberra the roads are so empty, big and unused there is zero excuse for their behaviour other than being arseholes.

[Lappa]

In response to an earlier post re vehicle Speedos not being allowed to be 100% accurate. That is not the case. Speedos are covered by ADR 18/03 which changed in July 2007 on all model vehicles and July 2006 on all new model vehicles.

It basically states that a vehicle cannot travel at a greater speed than indicated on the Speedo. The Speedo may show a speed greater than that being travelled by no more than 10% + 4Km/hr.
There is nothing in the rules to say it can’t be 100% accurate.

Previously an accuracy of +- 10% was required at speeds above 40km/hr.

The ADR also spells out tyre sizes, air pressure etc etc.

[doug3030]

people actively accelerate if you indicate to move into their lane to deliberately block you off

Which is why they have learned to:


they indicate WHEN they turn or move lanes (not before)

Makes sense to me. I learned that the first week in Melbourne.

Red light running was not so bad in Canberra last time I was there (July) but when I was living there in the 1990's if I stopped at a red light people used to change lanes behind me to go through the red light.

[John Saxton]

How many of us acquaint ourselves with the driving regulations when we drive interstate?I guess like a lot of us I have'nt done so but merely stick to what I would deem to be as courteous as possible not always easy to do when you live in a State where all the bad habits on the road are evident.
Have not driven in central Melbourne with the requirement to pull over to the left to make a right hand turn ,but that is one that I am aware of as my sister drove us through the city there.
I do agree with the comments above regarding bad drivers ,like most of us we have seen it very evident.Intolerance & bad manners, a need to be somewhere yesterday without timely planning is given over to ignorance of any other road user once some personas hop behind a steering wheel of a vehicle.

[Sturdee]

Have not driven in central Melbourne with the requirement to pull over to the left to make a right hand turn ,but that is one that I am aware of as my sister drove us through the city there.


Our famous hook turns, whilst they scare of interstaters they make absolute sense to us. It is to stop trams being held up by drivers wanting to turn right in front of trams.

There are quite a number of different road laws between Victoria and other states and it is always wise to acquaint yourself with other states road laws.

Peter

[beefy]

We've recently got ourselves a cute little 1500cc car for fuel economy and we're loving the hugely reduced petrol costs. Our Territory hardly gets used now. Got to say I've also noticed the cowardly acts of drivers tailgating more when I'm in this little car vs the Territory. We went to the Great Ocean Road a few days ago and got tailgates a lot around the suburbs near the Ferry terminal. I committed the big sin of travelling at the speed limit LOL. I deal with these jerks by slowing down at least 10 Ks and making it very obvious I'm looking at them in my mirror. Anyway the road rules book does say that when tailgated you should slow down for safety. Lots of times they then back off once its clicked with them what I'm doing. Little car with angry scowling male driver.

I recommend using reverse psychology when merging onto a packed crawling highway in peak hour. I've found when you make it obvious you are waiting for the kindness of another driver to let you in, someone normally does. Their's often a few selfish dicks that won't help you but in the end someone sees you are making zero attempt to push in and they open up a gap for you. I wind my window down afterwards and gesture a thanks. If only we could gravitate to this a little more.

It doesn't seem to work so good with overtaking though. When I lived in Singapore some drivers had this really dumb mentality called "Kiasu". If a driver overtook you, or pulled in front of you, etc, etc, they had "won". Never thought I'd see such stupidity in a supposedly civilised western country. There's countless times I've pulled out to overtake a driver doing say 90-95 Ks. As I overtake them I notice I'm not getting anywhere yet I'm at 100. I go up to 105 and still I'm not gaining. So up to 110 and I manage to get past them. Finally I pull back in the lane and reduce speed to 100. Now they start dropping behind me so obviously they sped up when I started to overtake and only reduce speed afterwards once they've enjoyed screwing me for no reason. So this ridiculous Kiasu is alive and strong here. I really don't understand what the f*&k is wrong with a lot of people. We live in a wonderful country and yet so many are angry and confrontational and wanting to screw each other for the sake of it.

Then our wonderful government puts that infuriating advert on TV, showing a driver giving abuse to another driver, while his kid is sitting in the back seat observing it all. Problem is a lot of the time the driver giving the abuse is the victim, and he's venting off because of the relentless crap that gets thrown at him every day. I'm one of those frustrated drivers. It probably makes the good drivers spit the dummy when our government basically tells us to stay calm and civil while Mr Hoon repeatedly rams us up the bum bum. Wonderful solution using taxpayers money for ads that say, "don't be like that", instead of tackling the real problem. The police force could have plain cars all over the place collecting fines for generally bad/aggressive driving. I'm sure it would pay for the costs. If drivers knew these cops were out doing this I reckon we'd see a big difference in a relatively short time.

[matt_s]

We've recently got ourselves a cute little 1500cc car... got tailgates a lot... I committed the big sin of travelling at the speed limit...

Have you checked the speedo against a GPS? Took wife's new Golf for a run and had people passing us constantly. Checked the speedo and it's fully 7kms/hr off. Speedo says 100, we're doing 93.

[doug3030]

Have you checked the speedo against a GPS? Took wife's new Golf for a run and had people passing us constantly. Checked the speedo and it's fully 7kms/hr off. Speedo says 100, we're doing 93.

Yep, in my car when I am doing 100 km/h by the GPS the speedo reads 109. But that is legal (can read lower by up to 10% plus 4 km/h - you can have your speedo reading 100 and actually be doing 86 and the speedo is within the tolerances.) That standard came in a few years ago. Cars I had prior to the standard generally had a speedo which was out by reading under, so the speedo could read 100 and I could have actually been doing 110 in an older car. Speedo is legal but you still get booked for it.

Is it any wonder drivers get frustrated.


There's countless times I've pulled out to overtake a driver doing say 90-95 Ks. As I overtake them I notice I'm not getting anywhere yet I'm at 100. I go up to 105 and still I'm not gaining. So up to 110 and I manage to get past them. Finally I pull back in the lane and reduce speed to 100. Now they start dropping behind me so obviously they sped up when I started to overtake and only reduce speed afterwards once they've enjoyed screwing me for no reason. So this ridiculous Kiasu is alive and strong here. I really don't understand what the f*&k is wrong with a lot of people. We live in a wonderful country and yet so many are angry and confrontational and wanting to screw each other for the sake of it.

I often find when driving on the open highway there will be a vehicle going along at 90 km/h or so - until you get to an overtaking lane where you think you can finally get past them. As soon as you get onto the overtaking lane they speed up to 110 and stay there until you can't pass them any more then drop back to 90 again. Happens all the time.

[AlexS]

Rob, I've never driven in Texas, but I'd be interested in hearing your comments on LA driving. I'd never driven in the USA before this year, but a few Americans had warned me about LA driving, so I wasn't looking forward to navigating my way in an unfamiliar car, to LA Int'l Airport during the evening peak hour.

Frankly, I found it far less terrifying than expected. Sure, it's fast, and the drivers sit close behind, but they'll let you change lanes, and I didn't notice any road rage. (Also, the roads are well signposted.)

[rob streeper]

Alex,

LA drivers can be extremely fast, particularly at peak commuting hours but as you observed they often know how to drive fast. I've found that you must be ready to go-with-the-flow or you'll be run down.

The major US coastal cities are all similar in that way. I remember driving on the DC beltway at about 85 mph at rush hour, my tires skipping and squealing on the pavement joints with surrounding cars so closely packed that they were literally within touching distance. If anybody had made a false move it would have been mayhem. It's likely that the demands of highway driving quickly weed out those whose skills aren't up to snuff. BTW, beware of cars bearing diplomatic plates in the DC area if you go, they don't have to obey the laws - diplomatic immunity.

Drivers in the major cities of Texas are also very fast but with the critical difference that many of them are extremely unskilled. We've also had a couple of road rage shootings recently in SA. The only place where I think drivers may be worse is Arizona.

[doug3030]

BTW, beware of cars bearing diplomatic plates in the DC area if you go, they don't have to obey the laws - diplomatic immunity.

We get the same in Canberra, Rob

[beefy]

Good points about checking my speedo, I'll look into that.

Talking about other countries:

I think many would consider life cheap in 3rd world countries, and if you are on a main road when you shouldn't be, you may end up as an asphalt pizza.

Nearly 30 years ago I was in super busy Bangkok. I was crossing at the lights of one of these 6 lane busy roads, and I ended up crossing after the lights went green. I thought I was dead meat, staring in horror at a wall of cars that I envisioned were about to plough me down, but to my amazement EVERYONE stopped at the line and waited for me while I ran to get to the pavement.

And no angry shouts, gestures, or honking horns. Wow, was I impressed.

Imagine what would happen here, it would be like a horn orchestra with lots of "singing". Multiple conductors too, with all the arms waving in the cars. Sorry, couldn't resist LOL.

[doug3030]

Nearly 30 years ago I was in super busy Bangkok. I was crossing at the lights of one of these 6 lane busy roads, and I ended up crossing after the lights went green. I thought I was dead meat, staring in horror at a wall of cars that I envisioned were about to plough me down, but to my amazement EVERYONE stopped at the line and waited for me while I ran to get to the pavement.

Many years ago now, I turned left into the left hand lane of a six-lane street in Jakarta. A car stopped and let me in. My next challenge was that I was turning right in 100 metres. As soon as I flicked my indicator on to change lanes to the right the cars in all five lanes in turn slowed down to let me change lanes and I made it across into the right hand lane with maybe 50 metres to spare. Never try that in Melbourne.

Thing is - they have learned that they HAVE TO drive like that. Next time it might be them who needs to get across. Nearly 30 years later Australian drivers are still driving with a ME ME ME attitude.

[Grumpy John]

We've gone a little off topic here, but that's okay. We're getting to the root cause of accidents, not necessarily road deaths. Most, if not all accidents are caused by drivers not paying attention, or being aware of their surroundings. IMHO, knowledge of road rules play a minor part in traffic accidents, attitude toward other road users plays a much larger part.

Have a look at this graphic from a recent newspaper article and tell me who you think was at fault. Try not look for reports of the accident, just give an opinion based on the graphic. I will post the link later.

426781

[elanjacobs]

2 is at fault. Traffic already on the road you are entering has right of way. Even if 1 was speeding, 2 needs to give way.

[artme]

Just recently there was a head of the judiciary appointed in one state in Australia. She had the effrontery
to criticize those who are critical of decisions made by her fellow judges!

When we have a judiciary that believes, and acts, as though it is is beyond reproach or examination then we have problems aplenty!!

[doug3030]

Have a look at this graphic from a recent newspaper article and tell me who you think was at fault. Try not look for reports of the accident, just give an opinion based on the graphic. I will post the link later.

Impossible to tell from the information available, GJ. Depends on unknown circumstances of relative speeds, was someone exceeding the speed limit, inattentive, intoxicated or just downright stupid? From that graphic there is not enough to give enough detail to tell without jumping to an ill-informed conclusion.

[Grumpy John]

Plenty of information Doug, who has right of way - the person already on the highway, or someone leaving a private property? The rules do not state whether you're speeding or drunk.

[doug3030]

Plenty of information Doug, who has right of way - the person already on the highway, or someone leaving a private property? The rules do not state whether you're speeding or drunk.

Maybe so if you take a narrow view of things from just what is available from the picture GJ, but "failure to give right of way " is just one of many potential contributing factors to that accident. How do we know for example that the car that left the school didn't come out when the road was clear and get caught behind other slow traffic only to get hit from behind by a speeding motorist who would have hit the car in front of them if they had not entered the road? Like I said, there's too much we do not know from just the picture so I will stick with my original answer and not make an ill informed accusation.

[Sturdee]

Whoever was first on the roundabout is not at fault (even if it came out of a private property) but the other is.

Road rules state that in entering a roundabout you must give way to cars on the roundabout which is different from the normal give way to the right on normal intersections.

Peter.

[Grumpy John]

Okay Doug you make some good points, however in this case car #2 had no one either in front, or behind and there is a long stretch of clear road to the left. And they are leaving private property, they are NOT on public road.

[elanjacobs]

Maybe so if you take a narrow view of things from just what is available from the picture GJ, but "failure to give right of way " is just one of many potential contributing factors to that accident. How do we know for example that the car that left the school didn't come out when the road was clear and get caught behind other slow traffic only to get hit from behind by a speeding motorist who would have hit the car in front of them if they had not entered the road? Like I said, there's too much we do not know from just the picture so I will stick with my original answer and not make an ill informed accusation.
The accident happened IN the intersection on a straight section of road (it's also flat, but that's not necessarily apparent from an aerial photo). Short of car 1 traveling at a physically impossible speed, there's no way car 2 would not have been able to see it.

Also, this intersection is NOT a roundabout, despite how it might appear, so we can scratch those arguments.

[Bohdan]

Whoever was first on the roundabout is not at fault (even if it came out of a private property) but the other is.

Road rules state that in entering a roundabout you must give way to cars on the roundabout which is different from the normal give way to the right on normal intersections.

Peter.

There is no roundabout involved. The incident was passed the right turn onto the roundabout.

They had to give way to the right and also give way as they were entering a road off a private driveway.

BTW On a roundabout you can only have cars on your right so giveway to the right applies as normal.

[doug3030]

Okay Doug you make some good points, however in this case car #2 had no one either in front, or behind and there is a long stretch of clear road to the left. And they are leaving private property, they are NOT on public road.

Aha... additional information was needed :rolleyes:

[Grumpy John]

From Vicroads:

Entering or leaving the road Hide (https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-rules/a-to-z-of-road-rules/give-way#expanding-869DFDF18527493495F8ABAF5C7EE1C2) You must give way to all vehicles and pedestrians when you enter or leave the road from a driveway or adjacent land.

[Grumpy John]

The accident happened IN the intersection on a straight section of road (it's also flat, but that's not necessarily apparent from an aerial photo). Short of car 1 traveling at a physically impossible speed, there's no way car 2 would not have been able to see it.

Also, this intersection is NOT a roundabout, despite how it might appear, so we can scratch those arguments.

Do you live in the area EJ?

[Sturdee]

Sorry, from the photo showing the divided road and the centre turning island I presumed that it was a roundabout intersection. In that case car no 2 was in breach of the Road rules for failing to give way.

I don't believe that car no 2 was leaving a private driveway but a legally definition road. Same as shopping centres and fast food places carparks are public roads as RBT has often demonstrated.

Peter.

[Grumpy John]

The school exit.

426789

[doug3030]

The school exit.

426789

I'm surprised that there is not a feeder lane to allow traffic exiting the school to accelerate up to highway speed before having to merge into the traffic on the highway. Would that be a contributing factor?

[Sturdee]

That is no longer an exit from a private driveway but officially classed as a road by evidenced by the give way sign, road markings and directional arrows on the other side.

[Grumpy John]

Okay, here are two newspaper articles about the crash.

Mother and teenage daughter killed in horrific Cranbourne East smash (http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/woman-and-teenage-girl-killed-in-horrific-cranbourne-east-smash-20170809-gxsywy.html)

Man fronts court over Cranbourne crash that killed mother, daughter (http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/man-fronts-court-over-cranbourne-crash-that-killed-mother-daughter-20171124-gzs2rw.html)