Speeding fine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan_574

I have to disagree with one thing midge sitting in roadworks zones is not a revenue raiser, the amount of complaints we receive from road workers is phenomonal. Stand close to the road when a car gos past, even at 40 is intimidating let alone having them go past you in excess of 60.

---

I agree with roadwork speed limits, but i disagree with police or Tenix standing there on weekends and nights booking people when there is no one there working.
A lot of times the signs go up before the road works start and are still there months after they have packed up and gone.
I do remember something about this some time back where someone got booked and the courts threw it out. But our wonderful dictorship we have running this state change the law.

But im sure if you have the time and want to dispute your fines there are piles of books in the state libaries with all the old english laws which most have never been repelled.

My worst-ever speed trap experience was on the Eyre Hwy, when I was working on a section at fraser range, about 110kmeast of Norseman. The worksite was about 10km from end to end and, as I was testing all the work, I knew precisely where each bit was being done. Soooo, I'm tooling along at 110, heading for the nearest area of work at the other end of the job, when who should pop up but Sergeant Plod, sitting with his little radar gun at a 40km/h workzone 8km from the nearest actual activity and which was actually due to be taken down that day, because the job was completed in that area. There were at least 5 other 40km/h zones before the active work area was reached, but he chose that one, knowing full well that people would have been travelling for several hundred kms at 110 and he'd get the best return.

it wasn't the $350 fine or the 6 points that bothered me, it was the fatarse loser copper's attitude of "if you want to argue about it, I'll arrest you and you can leace your car here and come into Norseman with us", when I pointed out the obvious facts. I have a lot of time for coppers in general, but some simply shouldn't be allowed out in public. I suspect he wasn't all that pleased when I pointed out that I had no intention of arguing with someone whose professional record after years of service fitted him for a job in Norseman - ar$ehole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan_574

We sit in spots where people speed, thats our job. We dont set the speeds we only enforce them. If you dont want to cop a fine dont speed that middle peddle works wonders.

I have to disagree with one thing midge sitting in roadworks zones is not a revenue raiser, the amount of complaints we receive from road workers is phenomonal. Stand close to the road when a car gos past, even at 40 is intimidating let alone having them go past you in excess of 60.

---

I have no objection to the coppers operating speed detectors - they save a lot of lives. I'm all in favour of work zones too, having been on a site in which a worker was killed by a car after the airblast from a speeding truck knocked the guy off balance into the path of the car. Sadly, however, some people are just lazy, including coppers and it's those lazy ones that give the rest a bad name.

I remember years ago when wayne Goss came to power in Qld, he made a promise to abolish speed "traps", in which the radar is placed at the bottom of a downhill, or just around a blind corner or at the change of speed zones, which used to be commonplace here in Qld pre-fitzgerald inquiry. I must say, however, that I've noticed a major resurgence in that sort of activity over the past couple of years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dazzler

And what is it, a highway or some mountain switchback in france. Long highways dont suddenly have corners so tight that you cant see 100m in front.

---

You obviously haven't done much driving...

I wasn't going to wade into this debate but this is one of those arguments that bobbs it's head up around here every now and then.
What people don't seem to be able to come to grips with is that speed limits are just that - limits. So in a say 60 zone you can drive UP TO 60km/h anything over that is speeding and punishable by law.
However most people assume that this is the speed you should be travelling at along this strech of road (and yes I do it as well).

And I'm sure sombody has already said it : "It's only a speed trap if your speeding"

BTW my last speeding fine was in 1984, in a Cortina (sorry BoB)

Now let's all use those tools, build a bridge and get over it.

H.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan_574

I have to disagree with one thing midge sitting in roadworks zones is not a revenue raiser, the amount of complaints we receive from road workers is phenomonal. Stand close to the road when a car gos past, even at 40 is intimidating let alone having them go past you in excess of 60.

---

Let me clarify the "revenue raiser" comment:

I was specifically referring to areas on highways (and the Bruce Highway between Brisbane and Caboolture has a beauty at the moment) where the speed limit has been reduced permanently for five or six kilometres, despite the fact that work only happens eight hours per day, five days per week.

How hard would it be to stick a bag over the signs? Easier than to set up a speed camera!

Last week we encountered three on the highway further north that were posted as "Roadworks" and 80 k, but had no works and no end speed limit sign. On Thursday afternoon, there were five areas between Gympie and Miriamvale slowing traffic to as little as 40kph, unmanned and no work. Currently there are sections of that road with a completed extra lane that could be used, but it's easier to keep it as a construction area it would seem (with those big radar warning signs and the shady parking for the van!)

No speed camera, so no revenue, but also the guys behind me who had all been travelling at ninety-something when I passed them, got mighty grumpy at me for slowing to almost the limit!

This may not happen in other states, but it's a regular thing in Qld, hence the only bit of sympathy for Rossluck!

Cheers,

P
:D

well said exador I agree totally there are some useful coppers and I work with a few, they do set up in easy spots, but there arguement is that the person driving sets the outcome, like I said the brake does wonders.

I sit at the bottom of hills but like alot of traffic coppers I give people 20ks leeway, its amazing how many people I let off at the 18 or 19 over mark. Alot of hills if you start at the top and dont accelerate you will not go over the speed limit by more than 10 or 15 ks. Some spots I only take loss of licence speeds which is 25ks or more over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan_574

On a side note, Ive just finished 2 nights of an operation where we got to use the new vehicle impoundment laws, I must admit a very good law. 14 cars seized for 48hours, most for speeding by 45 or more, 130 in a 60, 172 in a 100. Lets see if it changes these young kids behaviour so they dont wrap themselves round a pole, I suppose time will tell.

---

That sounds like a good policy except what is the situation if the offending driver is using someone else's car. Does the good samaritan lose their wheels?

I agree midge I wasnt having a go, there are some that shouldnt be worked but alot have the low speed limit signs all the time because of a number of reasons no emegency lane, no lines, gravely surface, litigation.

What annoys me is when people put us and cameras in the same boat, we use lasers where the cameras are radars, big difference, I agree that our cameras down here should be used better and we should have ones like in NSW where they are sign posted and are set up permanently at black spots.

We are there trying to catch people who are doing big speeds like the 30 or 40 over, the ones that will you or your wife and kids, but people still flash their headlights to warn others that a police car is there, I just hope it not there loved one I have to go and see splattered inside a car.

just had to jump back in.

Firstly I dont like speed cameras, person to person policing is much better and affords the ability to catch cancelled drivers, caution those with good records and even boost the QUOTA with mutliple tickets;). Plus it generally serves a better outcome to wheel around behind said speedster and follow for a few k's while SWMBO berates the driver with "I told you so's" and then stopping them and doing a licence check and a caution.

But, the philosophy of speed cameras is sound. That being to decrease the incidence of speeding and compliance with speed restrictions. The idea being that you will never know where one is so wont take the chance. The anticipated outcome being that the median speed of all traffic on that section of road being within guidelines.

This also is to take away the drivers own initiative, good or bad, of setting a limit they are comfortable with that may be outside what the road engineers consider safe.

Thus when bitingmidge sees the camera in a roadworks when no roadworks are currently being undertaken has nothing to do with that fact but the fact that there was a sign dictating the speed cars should be travelling at. Unfair at a personal level, reasonable when viewed within the initiative, that being that if I exceed the posted limit then I may get caught, even when I think the odds are in my favour.

Exceeding the speed limit is generally not unsafe within itself and its here that people personalise the issue of getting caught. You have not been charged with 'dangerous driving', a completely different charge, but non compliance with a prescribed limit. You might not agree with the limit but have no power to change it so you choose to risk being caught.

In my time in traffic enforcement only about 10% perhaps would claim they did not see a sign or were not aware of the speed change. Every time I would suggest they retrace that part of the journey and if they honestly couldnt see the signs to come back and we will do it together and if they were right I would withdraw it. Only taken up once and I was at fault (limit had been raised while i was on holidays:p )

happy driving

One positive with a speed camera is that large breasted, short skirted pouting blondes get tickets too:p

Just heard some debate on 3AW regarding speed cameras and road safety.
I think it was 1970 or 1980, cannot remember, but there were 1074 people killed on Victorian roads alone in one year:eek: !

Those were the days people were driving steel tanks like HQ's and XY'shttps://www.ubeaut.biz/chev.gif, and when you would drive home blind drunkhttps://www.ubeaut.biz/drunk2.gif
from the pub without the blink of an eye....tsk, tskhttps://www.ubeaut.biz/nono.gif.


....................................................https://www.ubeaut.biz/cop.gif...........................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by martrix

Just heard some debate on 3AW regarding speed cameras and road safety.
I think it was 1970 or 1980, cannot remember, but there were 1074 people killed on Victorian roads alone in one year:eek: !.

---

It think that was 1974 and the road toll was 1066. The Herald Sun started the campaign to reduce the road toll with the slogan " Drive to stay alive in 1975 ". That was so succesfull that it became the fore runner of the TAC road safety campaigns.

For a number of years prior to that it was the norm that over a thousand Victorians got killed on the roads and there were about half the drivers that are on the roads now.

It was the period that seat belts use was not compulsory (most cars didn't have them), there were no speed cameras (the cops had to follow you for a while to clock you), no .05 law (the cops had to pull you over and make you walk a line to see if you were drunk) and the roads were badly designed and built.

That were the alledged "good old days" where a driver could do what they liked and get away with it but the death toll mounted up every year.

I prefer the current system and have an even chance of staying alive.


Peter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dazzler

Only taken up once and I was at fault (limit had been raised while i was on holidays:p )

happy driving

---

Hi Dazzler,

A couple of years ago in Canberra I had a similar experience wherein I was stopped by a Traffic cop and informed that I was travelling at 75 or so in a 60 zone. I politely disputed that I was speeding as the limit had been raised a week or so earlier to 80 (one of the many dual carriageways there in PoliCity).

The officer didn't believe me, so I invited him to walk back a couple of hundred meters to an intersection where the '80' sign was. When we got there, he looked at it, and then muttered something about "well, they could have told us". Anyway, he was quite amused by it and scrapped the ticket.

Cheers!

Ross,
If its your first ticket in a few years, why not ask them to let you off, or at least let you pay the fine and retain your points?
This is an option, conditions vary between the states, but usually it is available for drivers with a good record.
Victoria has a "Penalty Review Board", I'm sure that QLD has something similiar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rossluck

I know that every day I gamble with the law

---

Of everything that has been said, this is the bit that worries me the most. Kinda sums up my impression of most 'professional drivers'. I used to drive up and down the Hume/Federal highway a lot. Used to see lots of 'gambling'.

My old man is always on about speed traps and revenue raising. Fact is you are supposed to be doing 60 when you get to the sign, not 100 metres after it. Good on 'em for pinging you, should happen more often.

My favourite here is the tourists who drive around at 70km everywhere, in the 100km zones, in the 80km zones and through town! I'd love to see some of them get pinged too.

On the multi lane highways and freeways it is an offence to travel at under 80kph in a 100kph zone, in any other than the left lane unless overtaking (Vic).
Problem is I have never seen it enforced and there is always someone willing to hold everyone up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iain

One positive with a speed camera is that large breasted, short skirted pouting blondes get tickets too:p

---

I haven't yet!

P
:o :o :o

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER- 1px inset; BORDER- 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by Iain
One positive with a speed camera is that large breasted, short skirted pouting blondes get tickets too:p
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bitingmidge

I haven't yet!

P
:o :o :o

---

Midge, the 'breast' he's talking about is about a foot ABOVE your belly button, not that bulge containing your belly button. And as for the short skirt, well, a lady your age should know better, but if you've got the legs to carry it off ...

Richard

Wow I had no idea there were so many members of this board that never speed, such angels, they must be the ones who drive in the middle lane on three lane highways with no-one on their left.:eek: :D

HH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HappyHammer

Wow I had no idea there were so many members of this board that never speed, such angels, they must be the ones who drive in the middle lane on three lane highways with no-one on their left.:eek: :D

---

And I like that. It gives me a clear run at a Brazillion miles an hour in the express lane (the one they build on the left of all roads for little-willy people).

Strangely enough, I've driven in other countries where the lane in which one drives is not an indicator of penis size, and it all seems to work there.

Speeding is dangerous. Creating angst and anger in other drivers by travelling slowly in the inappropriate lane is apparently a good thing, it makes them go faster, miss seeing the radar traps through the red mist, then they learn their lesson! It's all about education.

Cheers,

P
:cool: :cool: :cool:

I rarely speed. Well, I go with the 10 percent rule anyway. I have cruise control on the car. I dial up the speed I want and it's surprising how easy it is to sit back and do the speed limit (within the 10 percent rule) and not get impatient like I used to with my foot on the accelerator.

I don't sit in the middle lane, because hardly any of the roads I drive on have them. Infact hardly any of the roads here have more than one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentC

Of everything that has been said, this is the bit that worries me the most. Kinda sums up my impression of most 'professional drivers'. I used to drive up and down the Hume/Federal highway a lot. Used to see lots of 'gambling'.

My old man is always on about speed traps and revenue raising. Fact is you are supposed to be doing 60 when you get to the sign, not 100 metres after it. Good on 'em for pinging you, should happen more often.

---

What I was searching for on this forum was some realism and honesty, but a whole lot of apparently perfect people responded with rosary beads, technical manuals, and “tut tuts”.
<O:p</O:p
By gambling I don’t mean that I purposely break the law in a contest with the police. Anyone who drives breaks the law every time they drive. If you think that you don’t, then hang on to those rosary beads because you’re going to need them. Any realistic traffic cop out there will agree that they could fine any motorist they followed for some technical breach of the road rules. It could be as simple a thing as a brief toot on the horn as you pass a friend, not coming to an absolute standstill at a stop sign, or not putting your indicator on the required distance from an intersection (a favourite of all of you perfect people, from my experience).
<O:p</O:p
Anyone who tells me that they ALWAYS pass speed limit signs at the reduced and required speed is yanking their chain. This includes the police. Not only would this require the rigid conformity of a nun (why not extend the metaphor), but also the vacant dullness of a sheep.
<O:p
</O:pGet real. You can’t all be better drivers than me. You can’t all comply rigidly with the law all of the time. Doesn’t some spirited, human aspect of your intellects advise you that you’re being pendantically and condescendingly sanctimonious when you know full well that a lot of what I said is right.
<O:p</O:p
Imagine this scenario: you’re driving along at the speed limit, you round a bend, you see a 60KM roadworks sign, you completely back off the accelerator, look up away from the sign to assess the situation, and there is a police officer is waving you over. That quickly. Count through it: 101, 102, bang!. That, my perfect friends, is an unfair trap.
<O:p</O:p
My argument is a simple one. Every now and then, say 2% or 3% of the time, the police around <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com[IMG] /><st1:City w:st=[/IMG]<ST1:pBrisbane </ST1:p</st1:City>and the Gold Coast set a radar trap that tends towards the unfair. It happens. It is my contention that when it does occur, it is the type of things that attracts the (perhaps unfair) tag of revenue collecting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bitingmidge

And I like that. It gives me a clear run at a Brazillion miles an hour in the express lane (the one they build on the left of all roads for little-willy people).

Strangely enough, I've driven in other countries where the lane in which one drives is not an indicator of penis size, and it all seems to work there.

Speeding is dangerous. Creating angst and anger in other drivers by travelling slowly in the inappropriate lane is apparently a good thing, it makes them go faster, miss seeing the radar traps through the red mist, then they learn their lesson! It's all about education.

Cheers,

P
:cool: :cool: :cool:

---

Is this an admission to intentionally driving in the middle lane despite the keep left unless overtaking signs? Do you have these signs in QLD?

HH.

Revenue raiser or not, the best way to beat it is stick with the speed limit. If you can’t read numbers then come to uncle Wongo and I will give you a free lesson.

Sign me up Wongo :D :D

HH.

One of our heads of Traffic Police stated that fines for speeding were completely voluntary, if you do not want to contribute, it's your call.
I have two fines for speeding since 1967, and one was questionable given the speed limit signs location, but, I wore it and paid.
The other I was getting impatient as I overtook the dawdling unmarked car going up a hill:o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HappyHammer

Is this an admission to intentionally driving in the middle lane despite the keep left unless overtaking signs? Do you have these signs in QLD?

---

Not by me.

I thought I was clear: I intentionally drive in the left hand lane, because it's always vacant. The signs exist, but they don't seem to be understood.

A bit like the 60 signs apparently!;)

Rossluck, I don't think you are going to win! You didn't decelarate at all, (from 80 to 81 remember?) If you'd got down to 74 you may not have been booked, but you were doing more than 20 k's over the limit.

A quick stab on the brake would have done it for you, nothing dangerous, just a quick stab.....

Cheers,

P (who would have been done doing 68!)

:D

Good on yer Midge, the left lane is there for a reason and we should use it. This would prevent hot heads overtaking on the inside and adding to the dangers on our roads.;)

I think Ross luck was prolly doing 85 and slowed to 81 rather than sped up??

HH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bitingmidge

Rossluck, I don't think you are going to win! You didn't decelarate at all, (from 80 to 81 remember?) If you'd got down to 74 you may not have been booked, but you were doing more than 20 k's over the limit.

A quick stab on the brake would have done it for you, nothing dangerous, just a quick stab.....

Cheers,



:D

---

You're right.:D I want more like you, and fewer sheep. The debate shouldn't have been about me, but the issue.

Ross,
I think the scenario you are describing is that you might have been doing 85, saw the sign, eased off the accellerator and were pinged at 81... taking a long time to drop speed due to the load you were carrying?

I'd still go with the penalty review board avenue, if you think the radar gun was located too close to the sign that changed the limit.
If the situation was unfair and outside the guidlines for radar guns, then at least by writing a letter you make the person in charge of setting that radar gun consider and write a reply... chewing up some of their time. If its all fair and above board, at least you'll get an answer that you can consider.
It might not get a result for you, but you will know why they set it the way they did.

Dunno about QLD but down here, they have these "Roadworks Ahead" signs about 500m from where the speed zones change so you can't use that excuse.

I'm not a sheep. I hate getting speeding fines. I paid $450 in a three month period about 15 years ago and swore off them. Have had two since then. Not bad going for me.

I also have a bit of an issue with truck drivers, but that is another story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HappyHammer

Sign me up Wongo :D :D

HH.

---

No worries Hammer but you need to do some homework first.

Study these numbers

50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110. :D

Scott, you forgot the most important number: 40. Look after our kids!

Hey, did you see that guy on the TV who put the blinking lights at the crossings outside the schools at Lugarno and around abouts? He's a friend of ours, used to work with my wife. He's the same guy with the humungous christmas lights display at Lugarno - gets on the TV every year. He has this obsession with blinking lights ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentC

Dunno about QLD but down here, they have these "Roadworks Ahead" signs about 500m from where the speed zones change so you can't use that excuse.

I'm not a sheep. I hate getting speeding fines. I paid $450 in a three month period about 15 years ago and swore off them. Have had two since then. Not bad going for me.

I also have a bit of an issue with truck drivers, but that is another story.

---

Sorry about the vitriol. I was a little stung by your "glad you were pinged" statement. It seemed to match a lot of the more personal and abusive responses to my initial post.

You're right, you are not a sheep. And I'm not a truck driver.

No need for apology! I can give as good as I get but am still happy to have a laugh about it later ;)

I'm also very grumpy on Monday mornings. :mad: :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wongo

No worries Hammer but you need to do some homework first.

Study these numbers

50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110. :D

---

What about the wrinkly limit 40-30-40-30-40-30, might be difficult to fit on a sign:D

Do I pass?:p

HH.

well ross it was the way you were having a go at the person who booked you that they are on some sought of quota, wanting to rise through the ranks etc that I took offence at.
Lets look at your situation as you state in your first post you were booked at 81ks which if qld is like here you were probably doing 83(i will stand corrected if so) at 81ks your doing 22.5 metres per second. you say the copper was 1 or 2 seconds in when you were booked now if the copper is sitting there watching he has a 1 or 2 second time to react another 1 or 2 seconds to get your speed then another 1 or 2 seconds to put the gun down and then another 1 or 2 seconds to intercept you so here is 4 to 8 seconds that you have been travelling at 81 which equates to between 90 to 180 metres, these were rough estimates and in all probability it would be longer, thus increasing your distance, now if you look at from your view if you rounded a corner 1 or 2 second reaction time, you haven't even passed the sign yet, apply brakes which would have given you enough time to wipe off 20ks before seeing mr plod.
now no copper in there right mind would sit right on the change in speed zone because we all know that that if it was to be contested at court we would loose especially if you say that it just sprang out at you. Qld would be no different either in the way roadworks are set up in that it should have a set of speed signs then a repeater set 100m or so in front of the first set.
If he was using a laser or lidar which Im sure he would, (if it was a radar and there were other cars around they would cause interference) it should have the distance that you were checked at.
Here in vic police policy(not the law) states that we shouldnt sit within 100 metres of a speed sign(there are exceptions) this is due to fairness.
Most people who get booked and then think about it, start to believe that they were hard done by, if he was that close to the change in speed zone take it to court and Im sure you would have a good chance of getting off, in all likely hood you would have been at least 100 metres into the zone when checked. You said in your first post that you were 100m OR SO from the speed change then it later changes to 2 seconds which is only 65m, your stories already changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rossluck

Get real................... Doesn’t some spirited, human aspect of your intellects advise you that you’re being pendantically and condescendingly sanctimonious when you know full well that a lot of what I said is right.

---

Why don't you get REAL.

You were speeding before you got to the speed reduction sign and failed to slow down at all. Then you get pinged and whinge about revenue raising.

What if someone walked onto that road and you hit it. You probably would have killed such person. No doubt you think that is also being pendantic and a condescending sanctimonious point of view. But it happens.:mad:

Personally I think that the police should be tougher than they are and have at least 4 times as many speed traps on our roads until drivers learn that speed kills and that road rules are there to be obeyed by all, especially truck drivers.

Last year I sat on a jury where we saw first hand the carnage that speed brought about in a collission that would not have happened if the law had been obeyed. An innocent passenger in the other car killed and that driver suffered permanent brain damage as well as the offending driver and his passenger mate.

We found him guilty and he got 4 1/2 years but two families were and still are totally devastated.

So don't tell me I'm pendantic and condescending or sanctimonious or that you are making sense, for you are not. :mad: You are just a speeder that got caught, and IMO still got of lightly.

Peter.

I'm not going to bother with the "you were speeding" etc. I'm going to specifically address the coments on camera's, seatbelts and revenue raising. Let me say firstly that I don't like the way in which speed cameras are used in Victoria.

In 1970, compulsory wearing of seatbelts was introduced. The Road toll was 1061. In 1971 the road toll was 140 less. Coincidence?

In 1976, the road toll was 938 when random breath testing was introduced respectively. Over the next four years, the road toll dropped by nearly 300. Coincidence?

In 80, 81 and 82 Radar, Booze buses and Red light cameras were introduced. By 1988, 65 less lives were lost. Coincidence?

In 1989 the road toll was 777 ( a bad year). Speed camera's were introduced and in 1990, the road toll was a staggering 229 less than 1989 and has steadily decreased ever since. Coincidence?

Speeding is a causal factor in 26% of fatal crashes in Victoria.

Less than 1% of infringements issued by police (as opposed to 78% for cameras) are for 0 - 9 km/h above the speed limit.

Dan