Attitudes to the road toll

<style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> I have come to this thread late, however re Roundabouts... I live on the Central Coast and around here all of our big roundabouts are being converted to lights, as it seems they are a major contributor to traffic jams. They were dangerous as well with many prangs over the years. The point of a round about is that it should be possible for four cars to enter at once. This is a rare feat indeed.

I have noticed that there are two sets of rules as far as roundabouts go. One is what the road rules actually say. According to The RMS website requirements of entering a roundabout.
“The roundabout sign means Slow Down, prepare to Give Way and if necessary stop to avoid a collision. So, as you're approaching a roundabout, you must get into the correct lane, indicate if turning, and give way to traffic already on the roundabout.
Enter the roundabout when there is a safe gap in the traffic.”

And the second rule is what actually happens. On approaching a roundabout a driver will look to see if anyone is on their left, and then speed up in an effort to block that person. This happens on all the smaller roundabouts here on the Coast and up around the Hunter/Newcastle areas too. It doesn’t matter if you have already entered the roundabout; the driver on your right expects that you will give way. In effect converting the approach to the roundabout as if it were a jousting tournament.



I am a retired Parole Officer and have spent a lot of time in courts and have often facilitated a drink driver program called the “Sober Driver Program”. It is worth noting that 80% of first offender drink drivers never return to Court, only about 20% return for the second offence. Of that 20% at least 5-10% will continue to be repeat offenders. The program I facilitated was aimed at that 20%. It was thought that if these people could be diverted from further offending then the cost and danger to the community will be greatly reduced.

The program is a joint venture between the RMS, NSW Police, Attorney Generals Dept & NSW Corrections. It was a three-day course held over three Saturdays. I could always tell if there was going to be any change in any of the participants by the second day after we looked at a real scenario of a young father who had stayed too long at a pub lunch and consequently crashed his van and killed a much respected member of the local community. A part of the exercise was to work out the cost to the community in dollars and of course the emotional cost to the first responders and witnesses. It will run into the millions. The knock on costs and the emotional trauma cannot be fully calculated.

I am pleased to say that so far the program has a high success rate.


TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

Mum and Dad and I include every one who has posted to this thread do not have the skills to teach safe driving . . . .?

---

How do you know that no one else that has posted in this thread has not undertaken Advanced driving instruction courses ?

I think that mums and dads, or any responsible driver, are able to teach young drivers, many life saving things about driving.

Teaching a new driver how to get out of a complex skid and getting them to remember it when it first comes up 5 years later is a 3rd order issue issue compared to other very basic things that kids can learn from a responsible driver.

The most important things that mums, dad, friends, relatives, peers can teach are NOT advanced driving skills but basic attitudes to driving, most of which involve very little skill.
eg It's OK to
- drive 5-10 k's over the limit
- drink and drive
- , no wait - it's fun! to drift through a roundabout.
- drive with your seatbelt just half draped across your body.
- use a mobile while driving
- cut into the path of a driver with a right of way - just make sure you accelerate fast enough to get out of the way.
- drift through stop signs
- fondle your girl friend or VV while driving.
ETC

Attitudes to these things are being picked by kids well before they have a learners permit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

There are some extreme attitudes here none of which would change a thing. These threads stir up extreme thoughts without addressing the basics, always have and always will and everyone criticises all the rest of the driving world as "other drivers" infererring the critic is an expert driver and every other driver is a dill. There is one sobering thought in all this and that is there is no such thing as an accident, they all have a root cause and the so called "accident" did not happen by chance. The big thing is that governments treat the driving population as a source of revenue, criticise the drivers for causing accidents, plead with them to stop it all when the ultimate problem was thiers to begin with because they did not educate the driving population to begin with. Mum and Dad and I include every one who has posted to this thread do not have the skills to teach safe driving and all they do is pass on bad habits and poor skill sets. I taught advanced and competition driving when I was younger, was a professional driver for a large part of my working life and I still reckon my skills as a driver could be improved even after the eight week full time course I did back when I was a young man. In fact it occurs to me that the longer the mum and dad tuition requirements (L plates) go on for the greater the opportunity is for bad habits, poor skill building because the tutor never had the skills in the first place and has no right to be teaching any young driver anything. No one here has identified what the driver pulling out through the give way sign should have done initially but I will leave it to the experts to tell us. I stopped posting here as I could see what way things were going and I will stop again as I have no desire to get caught up in the "punishment is the only answer" argument. Who sets the parameters for the punishment?

---

Chris, while I see some good points in what you say, do you really think EDUCATION is the root of many of the accidents here. No one here has to be a super dooper driving expert to realise that people actually are taught some correct stuff when they learn to drive, yet they choose to ignore it and blindly copy what many others are doing, despite it clearly being a pretty dumb driving technique to adopt. Or are people really so stupid they can't think for themselves a little.

In addition to better driver education, I think a large part of the problem is attitude and the lack of interest in being a better, less aggressive, and basically less of an as*%ole driver. Education is all well and good and I think it could be improved a lot, but we can't put aside the attitude problem that clearly exists on our roads.

I think what we also need is an injection of fear, with drivers knowing the cops are out there in force, in plain cars, looking for generally chaotic and aggressive driving. If many drivers are going to behave like maniacs, that's exactly how they need to be dealt with. People like that won't give a toss about being educated, that will just be an inconvenience for them.

For the rest who would like to be good drivers, education would be great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beefy

I think what we also need is an injection of fear, with drivers knowing the cops are out there in force, in plain cars, looking for generally chaotic and aggressive driving. If many drivers are going to behave like maniacs, that's exactly how they need to be dealt with. People like that won't give a toss about being educated, that will just be an inconvenience for them.

---

Many years ago -when cops still patrolled the roads and drivers used to obey the rules and were more polite than they are now because of it - I had a friend who was a cop and patrolled in an unmarked vehicle. He said that whenever he had to pull someone over because they cut him off or failed to give right of way to him, they almost always used to say the same thing to him. "Sorry mate, I didn't know you were a cop!" Hes standard response was "So its alright to do that to anyone else, just not to cops, is that right?" Then he would write them a ticket. He said that the very few who said something like "Sorry, I didn't see you," were usually given a warning.

Police patrolling the roads is far more effective in behavior modification than speed or red light cameras. On the day you commit the offence you are blissfully unaware of the penalty and you get to your destination feeling good about yourself for saving so much time driving just a bit faster than you should and going through that light that might have just turned red. You get the fine three weeks later and it really means nothing. But if you get pulled over for speeding or running a light you have to sit there while they give you a lecture and write out the ticket and it slows you down and you lose time and you do not get to your destination feeling good about taking those chances and getting away with it - because you already know you didn't get away with it. Your passengers all know what happened and anyone you know who drove past will have seen you. Far more accountability to friends and family than a fine in the mail you don't have to tell anyone about.

The big problem is that the state governments are looking at the roads and the road rules as an income generating business. They have a business model of maximizing fines for minimum outlay and road safety is not even a consideration. Speed and red-light cameras are operated by businesses with a contract to the government. They are not even a police responsibility. the company that runs them is getting a commission from every fine they issue. If fines stopped people speeding then nobody would be speeding. If fines and suspensions stopped people drink driving nobody would be drink driving.

Topical article on todays ABC

SWK

60 offences, now killed 3 and maimed another. Annabelle Falkholt dies after Boxing Day crash, actress sister Jessica Falkholt remains critical - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Is my hard-line attitude too much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

60 offences, now killed 3 and maimed another.

---

At least he won't do it again.

The fastest speeding tickets issued in Texas in 2016 - San Antonio Express-News

I don't think the mobile phone issue has been mentioned only have to look at the penalty . Accountability of politicians will never happen but should as stated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiRob

I don't think the mobile phone issue has been mentioned only have to look at the penalty . Accountability of politicians will never happen but should as stated.

---

Mobiles have been mentioned 7 times in this thread.

Just to bring some perspective to this discussion, the NSW Center for Road Safety reported that Speeding, fatigue and alcohol are the three main causes of death and injury on our roads. In 2012 more people in NSW died in fatigue-related crashes than drink driving crashes and Speeding remains the greatest cause of death and injuries on our roads, contributing to about 40 per cent of road fatalities.


The National Drug Strategy 2010-2015 reported that : The cost to Australian society of alcohol, tobacco and other drug misuse ² in 2004–05 was estimated at $56.1 billion, including costs to the health and hospitals system, lost workplace productivity, road accidents and crime. Of this, tobacco accounted for $31.5 billion (56.2 per cent), alcohol accounted for $15.3 billion (27.3 per cent) and illegal drugs $8.2 billion (14.6 per cent).

Stats and more stats as at 28/12/17 NSW is at 389 road deaths which is ten more that last year and - Since the start of random breath testing in 1982, road deaths per 100,000 population have dropped from about 23 to 4.1 in 2014.

It is clear to me that there are many factors contributing to road deaths and that NSW Governments of both persuasions are actively promoting safer driving programs which are bearing fruit. Of course any death on the roads is one too many.

TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

60 offences, now killed 3 and maimed another. Annabelle Falkholt dies after Boxing Day crash, actress sister Jessica Falkholt remains critical - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Is my hard-line attitude too much?

---

ask yourself the questions -- why has this information been released? is it to deflect attention from some other relevant information? what relevance does a "long criminal history" have in the matter?

and remember in NSW registration and licence cancellation are used as punishments for offences unrelated to person's competence as a vehicle operator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

remember in NSW registration and licence cancellation are used as punishments for offences unrelated to person's competence as a vehicle operator.

---

Like speeding fines?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Like speeding fines?

---

A person can amass a series of fines for say fare evasion, shoplifting or for assaultive behaviour as well as for speeding. They fall behind in their payments and State Debt Recovery will have their lisence suspended. They will send a notification out to the last known address but if the person has moved or the letter gets lost the first they know about it is when they are pulled over by the police. Some people know they have been suspended but take the risk to drive because they need the work. As Ian says people can lose their lisence for reasons other than traffic infringments.
TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

As Ian says people can lose their lisence for reasons other than traffic infringments.

---

No he didn't. He said:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

for offences unrelated to person's competence as a vehicle operator.

---

Like speeding fines - which can have as much to do with your competence as a vehicle operator as fare evasion, shoplifting etc. You can get a speeding fine when driving safely and competently. All you have to do is cross an arbitrary boundary. In fact you don't even have to do that. You just have to be accused of doing it and not be able to prove your innocence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

No he didn't. He said:



Like speeding fines - which can have as much to do with your competence as a vehicle operator as fare evasion, shoplifting etc. You can get a speeding fine when driving safely and competently. All you have to do is cross an arbitrary boundary. In fact you don't even have to do that. You just have to be accused of doing it and not be able to prove your innocence.

---

I see your point. Speeding doesn’t necessarily make you an incompetent driver, but it does make you a law breaker. Not sure I get the point re accusations. I have several speeding fines over many years of driving and was caught dead to rights each time.
TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

I see your point. Speeding doesn’t necessarily make you an incompetent driver, but it does make you a law breaker. Not sure I get the point re accusations. I have several speeding fines over many years of driving and was caught dead to rights each time.

---

As I said a few dozen post back:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

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 https://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 in Victoria at least, speed cameras are not even operated by the police, or even the Government? The responsibility is contracted out to a private company whose income is derived from commissions from the speeding fines. That kind of blows any arguments that speed camera fines are not based on revenue raising. That company has a business model based entirely on raising revenue that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Did you know that in Victoria at least, speed cameras are not even operated by the police, or even the Government? The responsibility is contracted out to a private company whose income is derived from commissions from the speeding fines. That kind of blows any arguments that speed camera fines are not based on revenue raising. That company has a business model based entirely on raising revenue that way.

---

Plus an incentive to get it wrong... just sometimes....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

Plus an incentive to get it wrong... just sometimes....

---

and according to The Age, they also have a nasty habit of attempting to cover up problems, which when discovered can result in losses of commissions/revenue. So by inference, when the problem is not discovered, innocent motorists get to fork over their hard-earned cash.

State government reserves decision on troubled road camera operator Redflex

Have a look at the part about their dealings over in Chicago a few years back as well. They do not seem to have a good track record.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

No he didn't. He said:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

and remember in NSW registration and licence cancellation are used as punishments for offences unrelated to person's competence as a vehicle operator.

---

Like speeding fines - which can have as much to do with your competence as a vehicle operator as fare evasion, shoplifting etc. You can get a speeding fine when driving safely and competently. All you have to do is cross an arbitrary boundary. In fact you don't even have to do that. You just have to be accused of doing it and not be able to prove your innocence.

---

When I used "competence" I was actually thinking of parking fines -- if you want to contest a parking fine, State Debt Recovery (in NSW) has immutable deadlines, miss a deadline by even one day and your only recourse is the Local court. Not an option that is affordable for many people.

An adjacent municipality installed this speed monitoring road sign this year. Not visible in the picture is a high-intensity flashing white light that serves to attract attention. I haven't seen any reports of its general effectiveness but it has caused me to be more careful. It does not serve as a traffic camera, just a warning.

Attachment 427076

I've been reading this:

Emily M. Zitek, Alexander H. Jordan. Psychological Entitlement Predicts Failure to Follow Instructions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2017; 194855061772988 DOI: 10.1177/1948550617729885

The authors write that people who have a greater sense of entitlement also have a tendency to disregard rules and that this disregard arises from a sense that the rules are unfair. The paper is paywalled but if anyone would like to read it send me a PM.

I may be reading things wrong, but I get the impression that, on one hand people want offenders cars crushed, and on the other hand speeding fines are arbitrary and subject to manipulation by the company charged with monitoring speed cameras.
Sweeping statements like fines are only revenue raising tools are ridiculous. What would you have as a deterrent if not fines?
Generally, I believe that the speed limits set for both town and country traveling are pretty spot on, with a few exceptions. I also believe that the 3k allowance is too tight and should be 5K, either that or make it unlawful to place speed cameras at the bottom of hills.

This earlier paper from the same researcher

J Pers Soc Psychol. 2010 Feb;98(2):245-55. doi: 10.1037/a0017168.

Victim entitlement to behave selfishly.


Zitek EM¹, Jordan AH, Monin B, Leach FR.

suggests that subjective feelings of having been treated unfairly, both in the past and present, contribute to selfish or entitled behavior. If you Google the title you'll find links to access the full paper.:)

In the context of driving and this thread it raises the possibility that harsh punishments for driving infractions may elicit further bad behavior from individuals who have generalized feelings of having been treated unfairly into, if you will, a persecution complex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grumpy John

I may be reading things wrong, but I get the impression that, on one hand people want offenders cars crushed, and on the other hand speeding fines are arbitrary and subject to manipulation by the company charged with monitoring speed cameras.
Sweeping statements like fines are only revenue raising tools are ridiculous. What would you have as a deterrent if not fines?

---

How about asshole points?

A stern talking too?

Clearly that works for criminals with 60 convictions who end up killing 3 others while driving high on methadone. Yes, a formal letter of reprimand should do it.

[QUOTE=doug3030;2062628]As I said a few dozen post back:


http://d1r5wj36adg1sk.cloudfront.net...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by doug3030 http://d1r5wj36adg1sk.cloudfront.net...post-right.png
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 dash cam. 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.



Wow. I'm pretty sure that here in NSW the leeway is 10 percent plus one. I set my cruise control onto 118 kph when on the expressways and have never been booked by the police. Fixed radar is a different matter. I have a grey nomad friend who lives in QLD who will not drive in Victoria because of their radar traps.

TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob streeper

An adjacent municipality installed this speed monitoring road sign this year. Not visible in the picture is a high-intensity flashing white light that serves to attract attention. I haven't seen any reports of its general effectiveness but it has caused me to be more careful. It does not serve as a traffic camera, just a warning.

---

I've seen from time to time on the Newcastle Expressway a police car pulled over on the middle median strip just sitting there with its warning lights on. Every one slows done for a while. I've wondered if it was a bored copper or part of a strategy.

TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grumpy John

I may be reading things wrong, but I get the impression that, on one hand people want offenders cars crushed, and on the other hand speeding fines are arbitrary and subject to manipulation by the company charged with monitoring speed cameras.
Sweeping statements like fines are only revenue raising tools are ridiculous. What would you have as a deterrent if not fines?
Generally, I believe that the speed limits set for both town and country traveling are pretty spot on, with a few exceptions. I also believe that the 3k allowance is too tight and should be 5K, either that or make it unlawful to place speed cameras at the bottom of hills.

---

Well lets put things in perspective. The two idiots in v8's I saw recently on the M80 who were going a good 50 - 80 km/h over the 100km/h speed limit, weaving in and out of the traffic and braking sharply at a known speed camera site would deserve anything the law could throw at them - if they were caught. I think I speak for every other driver on the motorway that day that they would have loved a front seat to watch their cars get crushed, just to see the look on their faces. They had no legitimate excuse for speeding or they would not have slowed down at the speed camera site. They are the people who we really need to get off the roads - yet they are probably more skilled in operating a motor vehicle than 99% of the population. They have the skills but not the common sense. That type of behavior belongs on a racetrack where the cars have the proper safety gear and all the drivers are highly skilled and expecting everyone else to be driving like that.

However, I do not think there was anything to be gained by crushing their cars. Why reduce probably $100,000 into a couple of hundred dollars worth of scrap metal. Confiscate them and have a big auction a few times a year.

So yes, I am all in favor of harsh treatment when the punishment fits the crime, but wielding a big stick at everyone just incites resentment, as others have pointed out.

Quote:

---

Good men need no laws, and bad men are not made better by them.
(quote often attributed to Plato)

---

Now look at the normal daily speed enforcement in Victoria - speed and red light cameras operated by a private company on a government contract and earning commission.

To quote from the link I posted earlier:

Quote:

---

Ms Neville said it was her understanding Redflex was aware of the virus on June 15, but rather than notifying relevant authorities, it rebooted and repaired the system and failed to report the outbreak.She said the department became aware the virus had infected 55 cameras between June 16 and June19, but also failed to report it to her until June 22.
Redflex - which has declined to comment - did not tell the government about the additional 42 cameras infected until June 23.
A total of 97 cameras have now been identified as having the virus, mistakenly put into the cameras by a contractor during a routine maintenance program, Ms Neville said.
The outbreak of the virus has caused chaos in Victoria's speed camera network with all fines for the state's 280 fixed red-light and speed cameras on hold until a full investigation is conducted by Road Safety Camera Commissioner John Voyage.

---

So this company was aware of an issue that affected speed camera operation for several days and tried to conceal the situation presumably because it would have affected their commission if fines were withdrawn. How do we know how often this has happened and they have successfully kept it quiet? We will never know; but any of us, our friends and relatives could have easily been wrongly fined as a result.

This same company was also operating a "red light camera business" in Chicago. (to quote from the Chicago article "The Emanuel administration tells Redflex it will not be allowed to keep its red light camera business with the city.) Have a look at the link here to see details of the corruption and bribes that took place to get the system set up how they wanted it so that they would be profitable. http://graphics.chicagotribune.com/n...ight-timeline/

And to quote form this article:

Quote:

---

A Tribune analysis of more than 4 million tickets issued since 2007 and a deeper probe of individual cases reveal clear evidence that a series of sudden, unexplainable spikes in Chicago's network of 380 cameras were caused by faulty equipment, human tinkering or both. Chicago transportation officials say they had no knowledge of the wild swings in ticketing until they were told by the Tribune — even though City Hall legally required the camera vendor to watch for the slightest anomaly in ticketing patterns every day. Many of the spikes lasted weeks.

---

"Unexplainable spikes" n the network? Does this imply that there is a predictable pattern that occurs at a given camera when it is functioning correctly? And if there is a spike, it must be investigated to ensure that the camera is functioning correctly? Doesn't that mean that they expect a consistent number of speeders every day? But they cannot be the same people each time or they would soon lose their licenses due to loss of points. So, can it really be the drivers that are totally to blame?

And why do fines start at 3 km/h over the speed limit? Purely and simply because the company running the cameras would not make a profit if they were only allowed to book people who were doing more than 10 or 20 km/h over the limit. It would not be economically viable to run their business unless they had forced the government to allow them to fine drivers for trivial issues like going 3 km/h over the limit.

The threshholds for penalties for the whole system are based on the business model of a private company working on a commission income, and have nothing to do with road safety. Look at the bribes that this company has been proven to have paid in Chicago. Now look around and ask yourself who in Victoria is shouting loudest about speed cameras saving lives. I do not know if there is a connection or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

"Unexplainable spikes" n the network? Does this imply that there is a predictable pattern that occurs at a given camera when it is functioning correctly? And if there is a spike, it must be investigated to ensure that the camera is functioning correctly? Doesn't that mean that they expect a consistent number of speeders every day? But they cannot be the same people each time or they would soon lose their licenses due to loss of points. So, can it really be the drivers that are totally to blame?

And why do fines start at 3 km/h over the speed limit? Purely and simply because the company running the cameras would not make a profit if they were only allowed to book people who were doing more than 10 or 20 km/h over the limit. It would not be economically viable to run their business unless they had forced the government to allow them to fine drivers for trivial issues like going 3 km/h over the limit.

The threshholds for penalties for the whole system are based on the business model of a private company working on a commission income, and have nothing to do with road safety. Look at the bribes that this company has been proven to have paid in Chicago. Now look around and ask yourself who in Victoria is shouting loudest about speed cameras saving lives. I do not know if there is a connection or not.

---

Governments engaging private enterprise to own/operate anything as a means of paying for the infrastructure is inherently flawed. Private enterprise are in it for money, nothing else. If there wasn't a way to make money they wouldn't invest. For anyone, especially politicians, to say that these companies are in the business of road safety is ridiculous. They are exploiting the community and its in their interests for Road Safety to NOT improve, that is their business model. If they improved road safety, they wouldn't be profitable.

Regarding the unexplainable spikes in the network, this actually makes sense as a method of monitoring for issues in the network.

I'm an analyst, and if it was me, i'd be looking at the trend of fines over a certain time frame (days, weeks, peak hour, off peak etc). There'd be an average amount of cars being pinged. You'd have to factor in seasonality (public holidays, Xmas break, major events etc), but by and large it'd all be pretty constant.

If you had an unexplained spike (or dip for that matter) in fines at a certain time that can't be explained by a major event, weather, festive season etc, then that would be a trigger to investigate and make sure the equipment is running as it should.

It may well be that there were a bunch of idiots all driving through that trap at a particular time, and its not to say the equipment is faulty, but its a flag to run a diagnositc.

So in short, yes there would be a somewhat predictable pattern with each camera.

What possible incentive would any of our current crop of pollies have in investigating faulty camera operation. It only can result in a drop in their income and a further smear to their reputation.

Admitedly their current reputation is so poor that it probably couldn't be made worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grumpy John

What would you have as a deterrent if not fines?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

How about asshole points?

A stern talking too?

Clearly that works for criminals with 60 convictions who end up killing 3 others while driving high on methadone. Yes, a formal letter of reprimand should do it.

---

I see that you have bought the story someone in authority wanted you to buy.

In the ABC's report of the crash there is a lot of positive information about two of the five victims, and a lot negative information about one, Mr Whitall.

Quote:

---

Police said Mr Whitall had a long criminal history and had been jailed for driving while disqualified.
At the time of the crash, he was driving with P-plates having only recently got his licence back.
Mr Whitall was "well-known" to police in his hometown of Ulladulla and had more than 60 offences on his record as well as a number of aliases, authorities said.
The issue of whether Mr Whitall was on methadone or other drugs at the time of the crash will be part of the coronial investigation.

---

implies to me that someone is trying to deflect interest -- the question is to deflect public interest from what? Around the time of the crash had police been following Mr Whitall waiting for another "gotcha" opportunity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dibbers

I'm an analyst, and if it was me, i'd be looking at the trend of fines over a certain time frame (days, weeks, peak hour, off peak etc). There'd be an average amount of cars being pinged. You'd have to factor in seasonality (public holidays, Xmas break, major events etc), but by and large it'd all be pretty constant.

If you had an unexplained spike (or dip for that matter) in fines at a certain time that can't be explained by a major event, weather, festive season etc, then that would be a trigger to investigate and make sure the equipment is running as it should.

It may well be that there were a bunch of idiots all driving through that trap at a particular time, and its not to say the equipment is faulty, but its a flag to run a diagnositc.

So in short, yes there would be a somewhat predictable pattern with each camera.

---

Thanks Dibbers,

As an analyst, what do you make of it when there is a consistent, predictable number of different drivers committing the same offence at the same location every day when the speed limit is clearly defined and the location is a well-known speed camera site, day after day, week after week, month after month... ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Thanks Dibbers,

As an analyst, what do you make of it when there is a consistent, predictable number of different drivers committing the same offence at the same location every day when the speed limit is clearly defined and the location is a well-known speed camera site, day after day, week after week, month after month... ?

---

It wouldn't be a constant number. And not everyone that drives down that road has done so before, and even if they have they might have a lapse in concentration.

How i'd do it (this is a simple method, and i'm sure the methods used would be far more complex), Say on average 1000 people get pinged on fridays over the course of a year, 75% during peak our. If one normal friday (i.e. no holidays, major events, traffic incidents etc), 1500 people get pinged, thats a variance of +50%. Run a diagnostic.

Inverse applies. If on a normal Friday 500 people get pinged, thats a variance of -50%, run a diagnostic.

If on a normal friday 957 people get pinged, assume all is working as expected.

Its not saying that they know exactly how many people will get pinged on any given day, you model the data to give you an average, or an expected number, determine what is an acceptable system tollerance, and anything outside of that you'd investigate.

Again, if it does fluctuate wildly, that isn't to say something is wrong, its just a flag to check the systems.

Another way to look at it is like any other company projecting profits, say Coles for example. You have no idea how much people will spend on groceries, but you can estimate based on previous years sales, factoring in population change in your stores catchment, competition opening/closing in the area etc... you provide a projection for your shareholders. You may have to revise it part way through the year if your projections were off but you still need a baseline to work off.

"The man will face the ACT Magistrates Court on Wednesday morning, charged with culpable drive causing death, failing to stop and give assistance, disqualified driving, driving while unregistered, driving an uninsured vehicle and exceeding the speed limit."

Crash Tuesday night here: Man charged after person dies in Hughes crash on Tuesday night

Its always the same... isn't it?

Some drivers will get pinged by speed cameras no matter what....

Remember when the Sydney Harbour Tunnel first opened - in those days the speed cameras needed flash or good lighting to work. There were signs right through the tunnel stating that speed cameras were in use, plus a short really brightly lit strip roughly in the middle of the tunnel where the camera was. Obvious? Maybe to you and I, but it still didn't stop hundreds of people being pinged by the most obvious speed camera in Australia every month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

"The man will face the ACT Magistrates Court on Wednesday morning, charged with culpable drive causing death, failing to stop and give assistance, disqualified driving, driving while unregistered, driving an uninsured vehicle and exceeding the speed limit."

---

Christ - talk about collecting the whole set !

Whatever next? "Passing through a red light, drunk, while speeding, backwards, with the car on its' roof and on fire"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

"The man will face the ACT Magistrates Court on Wednesday morning, charged with culpable drive causing death, failing to stop and give assistance, disqualified driving, driving while unregistered, driving an uninsured vehicle and exceeding the speed limit."

Its always the same... isn't it?

---

NOPE

have to disagree with your "always" .

the number of lives lost on NSW roads in 2017 was 392 more than zero. In Victoria it was 255 too many.
on average, that works out at just under 2 people being needlessly killed each day.
If drivers like the one in your example were a typical primary causal factor, our court systems would be clogged with culpable driving cases. But they are not.

Concentrating on the perhaps 5% of incidents where what you have highlighted is a primary causal factor is, IMO, misguided as it deflects attention from more costly but more effective measures such as a more forgiving road environment, more accessible public transport, and a younger car fleet which incorporates more safety features. However, it does serve to deflect attention from more costly actions.


For an example of there but for the grace of god World cycling champion Caroline Buchanan expected to make full recovery after crash - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

"The man will face the ACT Magistrates Court on Wednesday morning, charged with culpable drive causing death, failing to stop and give assistance, disqualified driving, driving while unregistered, driving an uninsured vehicle and exceeding the speed limit."

---

At least he wasn't drunk :party5:

Ian, good post. It shows I've been subverted by their psyops! You are spot on. I wish I had your clarity of thought.