20000 people caught speeding in a week...

[Ben73]

If 20,000 people were caught speeding, there was probably 100,000 people speeding on that road who didn't get caught

[EDManual]

old thread..

but if 20000 people are caught speeding in a week, and there was not 1 accident, surely the speed limit is far too low!!

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by EDManual

old thread..

but if 20000 people are caught speeding in a week, and there was not 1 accident, surely the speed limit is far too low!!

Or we are just not robots, humans have a high tolerance than machines and gauges!

Got done the other week in the middle of no where <10kph...bloody hell. She asked why I was speeding, I said I set my cruise to 110 on the speedo which equates to 103 according the the speed checker near Geelong...

FYI people that excuse didnt work. But is there really a good answer to her question?

[Ezz]

Originally Posted by kaniSS

Who races a magna?

I use too. What's so funny about it? I know a few magnas that would have no problem nailing better 1/4 mile times than our XR8's, XR6turbos, FPV's stock or modded. There are only a few but they are out there. My old Ralliart Magna had no problem against HSV supercharged ux6 & Xr8's of the same era.

Mind you, they have no where near the same potential as our turbo 6's of sc 8's BF - FGs. ;)

If it was mitsiman's twin turbo magna that was caught in W.A, he'd have no problem reaching high speeds in seconds.

Check his tt magna out...
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r3A_zp3kGXE

And EGO's single turbo'd Magna VR-X
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZJur4OCX8k

[Olbucko]

Doing 96kph on a wet narrow rural road at dusk, limit 100, in an empty high riding twin cab ute, law says that is OK - Crazy

Doing 131 kph through Hay Plains, broad daylight, dry road, no traffic in high performance car such as XR8 for eg.- law says crazy,lock up the driver,takeaway his licence - what is so dangerous about that?

In some circumtances a road might be perfectly safe at 110 kph at other times 60 may be too fast, but these days the authorities are trying to tell us that the speed limit is OK but 1 k over is dangerous. The want to turn us all into sheep and not thnk for ourselves.
We are spending to much time looking at the speedo instead of the traffic around us and what the car 2 or 3 cars ahead of us is doing.

In NSW 30 years ago you could drive as fast as you liked on the open road, but if you were pulled over doing more than 80kph the onus was on the driver to prove that he was not driving dangerously.

[chamb0]

Originally Posted by RPI

We are spending to much time looking at the speedo instead of the traffic around us and what the car 2 or 3 cars ahead of us is doing.

Driving is an activity that requires multi-tasking and if you can't keep an eye on your speedo whatever the limit is, and drive safely, you shouldn't be on the road. It's not hard. Last time I checked, the speedo is positioned right in front of your face.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Nikked

If 20000 have been caught already, then that stretch of road was obviously deserving of a speed camera.

Or... the limit was set too low to begin with.

On a stretch of road with free flowing traffic, 85th percentile is a good starting point for the speed limit. Its not uncommon for the limit to be 10-20kmh below that in speed camera sites.

Reality is that by deliberately setting such low limits, they are taxing normal human behaviour.

The role (beyond revenue) for speed cameras is to put them at specific spots that are either black spots, or knowen for high rates off speeding.

Funny... I thought they supposed to be put at/near accident black spots....

[csv8]

Queensland Revenue Camera sites.
Within each Police Region, a Regional Speed Management committee selects speed
camera sites for that Region. Each Committee comprises of representatives from
Queensland Police Service, Queensland Transport, Main Roads, the relevant Local
Government Authority and the RACQ. The Committee’s decisions are based on the
number of speed-related and casualty crashes occurring at particular locations. This
information is drawn from the Queensland Transport crash database of accident
information.
Speed Camera zones and sites are primarily determined on the basis of location which
have a history of crashes. Secondary criteria for the determination of Speed Camera
zones and sites may include validated public complaints concerning speeding vehicles,
knowledge of road-safety related problems and road-work sites in order to ensure the
safety of road-workers.
A zone is one kilometer in diameter in an urban area and five kilometres in diameter in a
rural area. Sites are the locations within a zone where a Speed Camera will operate.
http://www.umcinc.com.au/uploads/SPE...20DOWNHILL.pdf

[b0son]

Originally Posted by chamb0

Driving is an activity that requires multi-tasking and if you can't keep an eye on your speedo whatever the limit is, and drive safely, you shouldn't be on the road.

Thats fine if speed tolerances are reasonable (eg. 10kmh). A cursory glance is enough.

When they set a zero tolerance and expect drivers to be able to maintain within 1kmh of the limit, then they are indeed forcing us to drive with unnecessary attention devoted to the speedo.

And for what benefit? There arent many road crash experts who believe the level of enforcement at the 0-10kmh infringement level serves much purpose. In fact, the biggest proponent of such stringent enforcement (Kloden) was caught out fudging the numbers to suit a pre-determined conclusion... (he was the clown that came up with the dubious 'every 5kmh doubles your crash risk' furfy).

Speeding is a cash cow, for the government, and for many of the crash experts who do the research for the government on the subject.

[flappist]

20,000 people caught in a week by the speed camera.

This means that 20,000 were speeding but were fined and allowed to continue to speed rather than slowed down.

0 cars crashed.
0 people were hurt.
0 people were killed.

Apart from revenue what did this exercise achieve?

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by flappist

This means that 20,000 were speeding but were fined and allowed to continue to speed rather than slowed down.

I've spoken to a couple of HP people who dislike fixed cameras for this very reason.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by flappist

20,000 people caught in a week by the speed camera.

This means that 20,000 were speeding but were fined and allowed to continue to speed rather than slowed down.

0 cars crashed.
0 people were hurt.
0 people were killed.

Apart from revenue what did this exercise achieve?

It helps the state budget bottom line, that is all.

I love the camera on the Gateway arterial at Nudgee. It actually causes traffic to back up now. Most mornings when I travel down that stretch the traffic is backed up to Boondall and mysteriously clears up just past that camera. Brilliant piece of safety equipment on a 90KM/h stretch that use to be 100KM/h.

[Peter B - CV8]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Or we are just not robots, humans have a high tolerance than machines and gauges!

Got done the other week in the middle of no where <10kph...bloody hell. She asked why I was speeding, I said I set my cruise to 110 on the speedo which equates to 103 according the the speed checker near Geelong...

FYI people that excuse didnt work. But is there really a good answer to her question?

I had a similar experience ie ;
OFFICER : "Excuse me driver, can you give me a valid reason as to why you were exceeding the speed limit by ten kilometres an hour & why I shouldn't book you" ??

ME: "Good morning officer, can you give me a few examples of excuses you've previously accepted ".

OFFICER: (smiling) "That's a pretty quick witted response & by far the best I've so far today. You can proceed - but take it easy ok ".

[graham7773]

just a little reading re the roads mentioned earlier in this thread about Californian roads and conditions.
eight of the top 10 were in Western states — California, Arizona, Nevada and Texas. The other two roads were in Florida. And all but the last road on the list were major Interstates.


If you live in the neighborhood, you probably already are aware of the danger that lurks ahead. If you don't, but you're planning on doing some cross-country travel, be alert:


Roads With the Most Fatalities Over The Last 5 Years, By County


1) 346 deaths: I-15 in San Bernardino County, California


Ironically, many fatalities on this stretch of I-15 may be because the road is so straight and wide.


“That road will put you to sleep,” said Baker Fire Station Chief Dan Tellez, whose station deals with all the emergencies along 75 miles of the highway. “And a lot of people tend to be speeding because it's so wide and so straight.”


Alcohol also plays a role in this highway's death toll. “We get a few people driving under the influence, coming from Vegas after partying all night,” Tellez said.


An accident last week killed two people when their car crashed into water barrels lining the freeway.


2) 182 deaths: I-10 in Riverside County, California


Two people were killed and four were injured in a four-car crash here in January, after a pickup truck veered into oncoming traffic.


But don't blame the road design, local officials say.


"Most of it doesn't have to do with the road per se," said California Highway Patrol Public Information Officer Chris Blondon, whose area includes part of I-10 in Riverside. "It more has to do with the drivers. Most of the crashes we see along that area are due to unsafe speeds. They're going too fast for the road conditions."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...#ixzz1vw7n3Jk8
My read of this and more of the same is that better roads and higher speed limits simply do not work. E.G. F1 race cars. Excellent roads, excellent cars, high speeds. More crashes than you can poke a stick at. 24 cars start the race and if 15 of them finish, it's regarded as a good result. If you are going to hit a brick wall, you want to hit it at 60kph or 120 kph? My choice would be 120kph. Death would be quick.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Peter B - CV8

I had a similar experience ie ;
OFFICER : "Excuse me driver, can you give me a valid reason as to why you were exceeding the speed limit by ten kilometres an hour & why I shouldn't book you" ??

ME: "Good morning officer, can you give me a few examples of excuses you've previously accepted ".

OFFICER: (smiling) "That's a pretty quick witted response & by far the best I've so far today. You can proceed - but take it easy ok ".

Ill try to remember that for next time..hehe

[Olbucko]

Originally Posted by chamb0

Driving is an activity that requires multi-tasking and if you can't keep an eye on your speedo whatever the limit is, and drive safely, you shouldn't be on the road. It's not hard. Last time I checked, the speedo is positioned right in front of your face.

Some speedos can be difficult to read accurately in certain lighting conditions or if you are wearing bifocal glasses, also in some cars they are harder to read in the day than at night or vica versa. My Forester is good during the day, vague at night, my Territory is ordinary during the day but very clear at night.
It is far safer to be watching the traffic around you than stareing down at the speedo.

[flappist]

The difference between theory and reality in this thread:

You start a theoretical argument.
Your holiday will be a reality.

Dong ma?

[Olbucko]

Originally Posted by RPI

Doing 96kph on a wet narrow rural road at dusk, limit 100, in an empty high riding twin cab ute, law says that is OK - Crazy

Doing 131 kph through Hay Plains, broad daylight, dry road, no traffic in high performance car such as XR8 for eg.- law says crazy,lock up the driver,takeaway his licence - what is so dangerous about that?

In some circumtances a road might be perfectly safe at 110 kph at other times 60 may be too fast, but these days the authorities are trying to tell us that the speed limit is OK but 1 k over is dangerous. The want to turn us all into sheep and not thnk for ourselves.
We are spending to much time looking at the speedo instead of the traffic around us and what the car 2 or 3 cars ahead of us is doing.

In NSW 30 years ago you could drive as fast as you liked on the open road, but if you were pulled over doing more than 80kph the onus was on the driver to prove that he was not driving dangerously.

I would like to add that if I was doing 130 though the Hay Plains and I saw another car aproaching I would drop my speed down to the speed limit or below long before they passed me, also I would not drive at that speed at night, in the wet, or if I was tired. I have been driving for 48 years with only one minor accident, 40 years ago. I have driven 1.3 million km on all types of city and country roads in the past 25 years without a single speeding ticket, I must be doing something right!

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by graham7773

just a little reading re the roads mentioned earlier in this thread about Californian roads and conditions.
eight of the top 10 were in Western states — California, Arizona, Nevada and Texas. The other two roads were in Florida. And all but the last road on the list were major Interstates.


If you live in the neighborhood, you probably already are aware of the danger that lurks ahead. If you don't, but you're planning on doing some cross-country travel, be alert:


Roads With the Most Fatalities Over The Last 5 Years, By County


1) 346 deaths: I-15 in San Bernardino County, California


Ironically, many fatalities on this stretch of I-15 may be because the road is so straight and wide.


“That road will put you to sleep,” said Baker Fire Station Chief Dan Tellez, whose station deals with all the emergencies along 75 miles of the highway. “And a lot of people tend to be speeding because it's so wide and so straight.”


Alcohol also plays a role in this highway's death toll. “We get a few people driving under the influence, coming from Vegas after partying all night,” Tellez said.


An accident last week killed two people when their car crashed into water barrels lining the freeway.


2) 182 deaths: I-10 in Riverside County, California


Two people were killed and four were injured in a four-car crash here in January, after a pickup truck veered into oncoming traffic.


But don't blame the road design, local officials say.


"Most of it doesn't have to do with the road per se," said California Highway Patrol Public Information Officer Chris Blondon, whose area includes part of I-10 in Riverside. "It more has to do with the drivers. Most of the crashes we see along that area are due to unsafe speeds. They're going too fast for the road conditions."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...#ixzz1vw7n3Jk8
My read of this and more of the same is that better roads and higher speed limits simply do not work. E.G. F1 race cars. Excellent roads, excellent cars, high speeds. More crashes than you can poke a stick at. 24 cars start the race and if 15 of them finish, it's regarded as a good result. If you are going to hit a brick wall, you want to hit it at 60kph or 120 kph? My choice would be 120kph. Death would be quick.

I-15 in California is a big boring road. I drove it a few months ago. Sitting on 80-90 mph for a good length of it. Started raining at one point so I slowed to 50-60mph.
The speed limit was either 70 or 75.
It's not hard to drive to the conditions.
Most of the I 15 is in the desert with wide lanes, massive dirt medium strip and nothing beside the road except dirt.
Not sure how many people would crash there, unless it's referring to a built up area closer to LA county.
I see fatigue as a major problem. It was so boring during the day. Probably much worse at 3am.

[BHDOGS]

I like this thread I must be a tip top driver as I drive past cameras without looking at my speedo more then once! I am better then the stig haha

[csv8]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

I like this thread I must be a tip top driver as I drive past cameras without looking at my speedo more then once! I am better then the stig haha

No !! The Stig is too fast !! goes past before the camera goes off!!!

[Matty4]

Originally Posted by Polyal

But is there really a good answer to her question?

Yep....
"I wasn't speeding"

By admitting to it on the side of the road you've just done 99% of the work required by the Officer to prove the offence.

Like the old saying goes, Deny, Deny, Deny....

[Bent8]

Ok, drove past it today and it's back on again...