Advertisement

‘Stop Pushing the Limits’ new campaign to slow us down

By 1 July 2014 28

A two-month campaign to target speeding in the ACT was launched today by Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Simon Corbell, and Chief Police Officer for the ACT, Rudi Lammers.

The Stop Pushing the Limits campaign will run throughout July and August 2014 and forms part of the ACT’s multi-agency road safety strategy. The campaign aims to encourage attitudinal and behavioural change towards speeding.

Mr Corbell said speeding was a major contributor to collisions resulting in injuries and fatalities on Canberra roads.

“Speeding reduces the driver’s ability to control the vehicle and lengthens stopping distances, increasing both the likelihood of crashing and the severity of the crash,” Mr Corbell said.

“When you double the speed of the car, you double the distance travelled while reacting to an obstacle and quadruple the braking distance. Doubling the speed also quadruples the energy of a collision.”

In 2013, ACT Policing detected more than 8,700 people speeding on Canberra roads, which included 6,652 drivers issued with Traffic Infringement Notices and 2,140 drivers cautioned.

“On average there are 13 deaths and 704 injuries on our roads each year. Road safety is everyone’s responsibility and we believe Canberra drivers can reduce this drastically by simply slowing down.”

ACT Policing will conduct targeted operations to enforce speed limits across July and August. Motorists caught speeding will face fines ranging from a minimum of $203 and one demerit point to more than $1,811 and six demerit points for each offence.

The 30 second television campaign commercial and radio advertisement, asks Canberrans “What’s it going to take to get you to notice the speed zone sign again?” and encourages drivers to stop pushing the speed limits.

The campaign will also be supported by a public display of crashed vehicles, including a crash-test vehicle provided by the Australasian New Car Assessment Program, which will tour major town centres in Canberra to demonstrate the severity of a vehicle collision.

For more information visit www.police.act.gov.au/stoppushingthelimits

(Simon Corbell media release)

Please login to post your comments
28 Responses to
‘Stop Pushing the Limits’ new campaign to slow us down
pezza 6:18 pm
02 Jul 14
#1

I’m sick of the obsession with the speeding message from a traffic safety perspective. While I can accept it’s a problem in the ACT, it’s far from the only one. The fact that they ignore all other safety issues in favour of just this one (well, this and drink-driving) makes it less meaningful to me.

It’s foggy in the mornings and dark by the evening commute – where’s a campaign to get people to turn their f’n lights on? Just because you can see where you’re going doesn’t mean others can easily see your grey car against a grey sky and grey road.

Where’s the don’t run red lights message? Where’s the don’t tailgate message? Give us a cheeky slogan to shame people who do those things and get some behavioural change through peer pressure.

gooterz 6:54 pm
02 Jul 14
#2

If people breaking the speed limits is causing accidents then raise the speed limits.

Its interesting that if a road is 90km/h when dry its also 90km/h when wet.

Given most accidents happen when it rains should we just ban people driving when wet?

Does anyone else wonder if canfan is simon corbell?

Speed doesn’t kill, its the acceleration that kills you

bigred 7:13 pm
02 Jul 14
#3

The message didn’t get through. I drove the length of Adelaide Ave on cruise control today. It was set to 80 km/h and is pretty well spot on at that speed. Got passed a lot, including by an ACTION bus. Reinvest some/most/all the revenue into the AFP traffic patrols and I reckon we would see some actual visible patrols as opposes to media releases.

Tooks 7:52 pm
02 Jul 14
#4

pezza said :

I’m sick of the obsession with the speeding message from a traffic safety perspective. While I can accept it’s a problem in the ACT, it’s far from the only one. The fact that they ignore all other safety issues in favour of just this one (well, this and drink-driving) makes it less meaningful to me.

It’s foggy in the mornings and dark by the evening commute – where’s a campaign to get people to turn their f’n lights on? Just because you can see where you’re going doesn’t mean others can easily see your grey car against a grey sky and grey road.

Where’s the don’t run red lights message? Where’s the don’t tailgate message? Give us a cheeky slogan to shame people who do those things and get some behavioural change through peer pressure.

I agree…partially. Except just because they focus on speeding during the month doesn’t mean they ignore other offences. That’s just nonsense.

The fact is, excessive speed is still a major factor in serious prangs. It is easy to police, but yes, when nearly every month is focused on speed rather than other bad driving habits, it is a bit ho-hum for most people.

gooterz 8:13 pm
02 Jul 14
#5

bigred said :

The message didn’t get through. I drove the length of Adelaide Ave on cruise control today. It was set to 80 km/h and is pretty well spot on at that speed. Got passed a lot, including by an ACTION bus. Reinvest some/most/all the revenue into the AFP traffic patrols and I reckon we would see some actual visible patrols as opposes to media releases.

The speed limit of the interchange in Belconnen is 20km/h.

I’ve never seen a bus stay under that.

Madam Cholet 8:19 pm
02 Jul 14
#6

It’s heartening that they finally think speeding is a problem in the ACT. Everybody can think of somewhere on their journey where drivers tend to speed. For me the one I notice most these days is the Monaro highway from the Quangers turn-off up to the gaol going north. Never ever seen a police car or speed van there and I expect most people go 100 there because they recall that it used to be 100 before the gaol arrive. Interestingly people who do 100 in the 80 zone don’t then seem to yo 120 in the 100 zone – not that much anyway.

Today I saw someone run a red light with a child in the back of the car. This is not an occurrence which causes me much surprise. Bus drivers running reds is also common place. They must think the length of their vehicle precludes them from having to stop like others.

Canberroid 10:30 pm
02 Jul 14
#7

bigred said :

The message didn’t get through. I drove the length of Adelaide Ave on cruise control today. It was set to 80 km/h and is pretty well spot on at that speed. Got passed a lot, including by an ACTION bus. Reinvest some/most/all the revenue into the AFP traffic patrols and I reckon we would see some actual visible patrols as opposes to media releases.

Maybe that was because the speed limit on Adelaide Ave should be 90 or so. The govt is always keen to lower the limit, but never seems to increase it despite improvements in automotive technology that would allow it.

magiccar9 6:12 am
03 Jul 14
#8

Canberroid said :

Maybe that was because the speed limit on Adelaide Ave should be 90 or so. The govt is always keen to lower the limit, but never seems to increase it despite improvements in automotive technology that would allow it.

The speed limit on Adelaide Av should be 100. It’s a perfect stretch of road which for the most part is 3 comfortable lanes wide.

We’re going to have crashes at any speed. If you continually slow people down using scare tactics you’re only going to frustrate people further, which will lead to more dangerous behaviour.

Police should focus on the real causes of crash statistics, instead of using the easy blame of speed. Poorly maintained cars, distracted drivers, deliberate selfish road behaviour (eg, constantly tapping the brake to ‘annoy’ the person behind).

The only real problem here is that drivers no longer give driving their full attention – which it rightly deserves EVERY time you’re behind the wheel.

milkman 6:49 am
03 Jul 14
#9

Yawn.

Lazy policy, again.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 8:18 am
03 Jul 14
#10

milkman said :

Yawn.

Lazy policy, again.

+1. Is it really people driving at 90km/h on wide, multi-lane roads with good visibility that is causing the ACT’s injuries and deaths?

Grimm 10:51 am
03 Jul 14
#11

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

milkman said :

Yawn.

Lazy policy, again.

+1. Is it really people driving at 90km/h on wide, multi-lane roads with good visibility that is causing the ACT’s injuries and deaths?

I’d say that more often, it’s people doing 20km/h below the limit in the right hand lane, frustrating the hell out of people and causing them to become impatient that causes more accidents than anything. I see it every day. The police should probably spend a bit of time targeting obstructing traffic, especially during peak hours.

Rollersk8r 11:29 am
03 Jul 14
#12

My immediate reaction was launching my own counter-campaign “What’s it going to take to raise the speed limits on some of our safest and widest main roads?”

Limits are frequently lowered for “safety” but never raised when sensible to do so.

Of course speed is a factor in all collisions – cars that are stopped rarely run into each other.

tim_c 12:09 pm
03 Jul 14
#13

“Doubling the speed also quadruples the energy of a collision.”

So according to Mr Corbell, my high school physics teacher was wrong when he taught us E=mv²?
(where E= energy, m = mass, and v = velocity).

Of course, according to the formula, we should be introducing reduced speed limits for obese drivers.

Ghettosmurf87 12:32 pm
03 Jul 14
#14

tim_c said :

“Doubling the speed also quadruples the energy of a collision.”

So according to Mr Corbell, my high school physics teacher was wrong when he taught us E=mv²?
(where E= energy, m = mass, and v = velocity).

Of course, according to the formula, we should be introducing reduced speed limits for obese drivers.

So, if the initial velocity was 3 and the mass was 1, then E=9

if the velocity then doubles to 6, E now equals 36, correct?

Did the energy just quadruple?

KB1971 1:28 pm
03 Jul 14
#15

Grimm said :

I’d say that more often, it’s people doing 20km/h below the limit in the right hand lane, frustrating the hell out of people and causing them to become impatient that causes more accidents than anything. I see it every day. The police should probably spend a bit of time targeting obstructing traffic, especially during peak hours.

From the ACT version of the ARRS, what you describe is not obstructung traffic, & if its an 80 zone they are allower to be there. The cranky people need to take a chill pill:

Division 1 General
125 Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians
(1) A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another
driver or a pedestrian.
Offence provision.
Note Driver includes a person in control of a vehicle — see the
definition of drive in the dictionary.
(2) For this rule, a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the
path of another driver or a pedestrian only because:
(a) the driver is stopped in traffic; or
(b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles
(unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the
circumstances).
Example of a driver driving abnormally slowly
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road
to which a speed-limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is
no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road.

m_ratt 2:32 pm
03 Jul 14
#16

KB1971 said :

Grimm said :

I’d say that more often, it’s people doing 20km/h below the limit in the right hand lane, frustrating the hell out of people and causing them to become impatient that causes more accidents than anything. I see it every day. The police should probably spend a bit of time targeting obstructing traffic, especially during peak hours.

From the ACT version of the ARRS, what you describe is not obstructung traffic, & if its an 80 zone they are allower to be there. The cranky people need to take a chill pill:

Division 1 General
125 Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians
(1) A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another
driver or a pedestrian.
Offence provision.
Note Driver includes a person in control of a vehicle — see the
definition of drive in the dictionary.
(2) For this rule, a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the
path of another driver or a pedestrian only because:
(a) the driver is stopped in traffic; or
(b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles
(unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the
circumstances).
Example of a driver driving abnormally slowly
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road
to which a speed-limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is
no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road.

Read that again and think about it.

20km/h below the limit is the example of abnormally slowly. Abnormally slowly is obstructing.

Road rule aside, it’s inconsiderate and dangerous, and should not be encouraged or tolerated.

Grimm 3:09 pm
03 Jul 14
#17

KB1971 said :

Grimm said :

I’d say that more often, it’s people doing 20km/h below the limit in the right hand lane, frustrating the hell out of people and causing them to become impatient that causes more accidents than anything. I see it every day. The police should probably spend a bit of time targeting obstructing traffic, especially during peak hours.

From the ACT version of the ARRS, what you describe is not obstructung traffic, & if its an 80 zone they are allower to be there. The cranky people need to take a chill pill:

Division 1 General
125 Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians
(1) A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another
driver or a pedestrian.
Offence provision.
Note Driver includes a person in control of a vehicle — see the
definition of drive in the dictionary.
(2) For this rule, a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the
path of another driver or a pedestrian only because:
(a) the driver is stopped in traffic; or
(b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles
(unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the
circumstances).
Example of a driver driving abnormally slowly
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road
to which a speed-limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is
no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road.

Yeah, apart from the fact they are ignoring the “Keep left unless overtaking” signs all down the road.

It’s also incredibly inconsiderate. Doing things just because you can often makes you a fair kn&b.

MonarchRepublic 3:17 pm
03 Jul 14
#18

m_ratt said :

KB1971 said :

Grimm said :

I’d say that more often, it’s people doing 20km/h below the limit in the right hand lane, frustrating the hell out of people and causing them to become impatient that causes more accidents than anything. I see it every day. The police should probably spend a bit of time targeting obstructing traffic, especially during peak hours.

From the ACT version of the ARRS, what you describe is not obstructung traffic, & if its an 80 zone they are allower to be there. The cranky people need to take a chill pill:

Division 1 General
125 Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians
(1) A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another
driver or a pedestrian.
Offence provision.
Note Driver includes a person in control of a vehicle — see the
definition of drive in the dictionary.
(2) For this rule, a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the
path of another driver or a pedestrian only because:
(a) the driver is stopped in traffic; or
(b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles
(unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the
circumstances).
Example of a driver driving abnormally slowly
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road
to which a speed-limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is
no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road.

Read that again and think about it.

20km/h below the limit is the example of abnormally slowly. Abnormally slowly is obstructing.

Road rule aside, it’s inconsiderate and dangerous, and should not be encouraged or tolerated.

60km/h below the limit is the example of abnormally slowly

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 4:11 pm
03 Jul 14
#19

Grimm said :

It’s also incredibly inconsiderate. Doing things just because you can often makes you a fair kn&b.

+1. Stick in the left lane unless you’re turning right or overtaking. A little bit of consideration makes things so much easier for everyone.

KB1971 4:12 pm
03 Jul 14
#20

m_ratt said :

KB1971 said :

Grimm said :

I’d say that more often, it’s people doing 20km/h below the limit in the right hand lane, frustrating the hell out of people and causing them to become impatient that causes more accidents than anything. I see it every day. The police should probably spend a bit of time targeting obstructing traffic, especially during peak hours.

From the ACT version of the ARRS, what you describe is not obstructung traffic, & if its an 80 zone they are allower to be there. The cranky people need to take a chill pill:

Division 1 General
125 Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians
(1) A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another
driver or a pedestrian.
Offence provision.
Note Driver includes a person in control of a vehicle — see the
definition of drive in the dictionary.
(2) For this rule, a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the
path of another driver or a pedestrian only because:
(a) the driver is stopped in traffic; or
(b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles
(unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the
circumstances).
Example of a driver driving abnormally slowly
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road
to which a speed-limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is
no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road.

Read that again and think about it.

20km/h below the limit is the example of abnormally slowly. Abnormally slowly is obstructing.

Road rule aside, it’s inconsiderate and dangerous, and should not be encouraged or tolerated.

I actually think you should, it says that someone doing 20km/h in an 80 zone for no reason is obstructting traffic.

20km/h below the posted speed limit is inconsiderate, yes, dangerous no. The rate of closure should not be that great that it becomes dangerous.

If you as a driver cant deal with the fact someone is driving slower than you then you need to re-assess your driving habits.

As a driver you should be ready to deal with things like this.

KB1971 4:13 pm
03 Jul 14
#21

Grimm said :

KB1971 said :

Grimm said :

I’d say that more often, it’s people doing 20km/h below the limit in the right hand lane, frustrating the hell out of people and causing them to become impatient that causes more accidents than anything. I see it every day. The police should probably spend a bit of time targeting obstructing traffic, especially during peak hours.

From the ACT version of the ARRS, what you describe is not obstructung traffic, & if its an 80 zone they are allower to be there. The cranky people need to take a chill pill:

Division 1 General
125 Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians
(1) A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another
driver or a pedestrian.
Offence provision.
Note Driver includes a person in control of a vehicle — see the
definition of drive in the dictionary.
(2) For this rule, a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the
path of another driver or a pedestrian only because:
(a) the driver is stopped in traffic; or
(b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles
(unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the
circumstances).
Example of a driver driving abnormally slowly
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road
to which a speed-limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is
no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road.

Yeah, apart from the fact they are ignoring the “Keep left unless overtaking” signs all down the road.

It’s also incredibly inconsiderate. Doing things just because you can often makes you a fair kn&b.

Where are these keep left signs you talk about? Last I saw them was on the Hume Highway heading north and south.

There may be one on the Parkway but I cant picture it.

KB1971 4:18 pm
03 Jul 14
#22

I will add, if some of you people think the driving habits of people here are bad, go to China……….

m_ratt 4:49 pm
03 Jul 14
#23

MonarchRepublic said :

60km/h below the limit is the example of abnormally slowly

Oh dear, it’s not been a good day for my reading comprehension. Apologies.

I wonder what would make 20 in 80 abnormally slow, and not 60 in 80 (without reason)? What about 40?
I’d argue that 20km/h below the limit without reason is still abnormally slow.

Where do they draw that line?

bundah 7:29 pm
03 Jul 14
#24

What Simon doesn’t say is whether there will be an increase in police patrol car numbers and if so how many to give this campaign teeth?

bigred 8:07 pm
03 Jul 14
#25

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Grimm said :

It’s also incredibly inconsiderate. Doing things just because you can often makes you a fair kn&b.

+1. Stick in the left lane unless you’re turning right or overtaking. A little bit of consideration makes things so much easier for everyone.

I will drive legally in whichever lane provides the smoothest trip. This means I may use the right lane in an 80km/h zone, eg Hindmarsh drive between Woden and Fyshwick. Doing so, I am only inconsiderate to law breakers. I have no dilemma.

Earl 9:27 pm
03 Jul 14
#26

bigred said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Grimm said :

It’s also incredibly inconsiderate. Doing things just because you can often makes you a fair kn&b.

+1. Stick in the left lane unless you’re turning right or overtaking. A little bit of consideration makes things so much easier for everyone.

I will drive legally in whichever lane provides the greatest opportunity to prove my do-gooding worth to all those big nasty people who used to steal my lunch money. This means I may use the right lane in an 80km/h zone, eg Hindmarsh drive between Woden and Fyshwick. Doing so, I am only inconsiderate to law breakers. I have no dilemma.

Fixed.

Canberroid 10:31 pm
03 Jul 14
#27

bigred said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Grimm said :

It’s also incredibly inconsiderate. Doing things just because you can often makes you a fair kn&b.

+1. Stick in the left lane unless you’re turning right or overtaking. A little bit of consideration makes things so much easier for everyone.

I will drive legally in whichever lane provides the smoothest trip. This means I may use the right lane in an 80km/h zone, eg Hindmarsh drive between Woden and Fyshwick. Doing so, I am only inconsiderate to law breakers. I have no dilemma.

And I bet you take five seconds to notice that the lights turned green and then accelerate painfully slowly in the right hand lane so that a bunch of cars behind you get stuck at the lights, and you probably don’t even notice. You’re probably also one of those drivers that slow down to 40km/hr on Northbourne through Civic and unnecessarily waste more peoples’ time with traffic lights which are timed for 60km/hr, and again don’t even notice.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 9:13 am
04 Jul 14
#28

bigred said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Grimm said :

It’s also incredibly inconsiderate. Doing things just because you can often makes you a fair kn&b.

+1. Stick in the left lane unless you’re turning right or overtaking. A little bit of consideration makes things so much easier for everyone.

I will drive legally in whichever lane provides the smoothest trip. This means I may use the right lane in an 80km/h zone, eg Hindmarsh drive between Woden and Fyshwick. Doing so, I am only inconsiderate to law breakers. I have no dilemma.

In other words, driving is all about you, and you couldn’t give a stuff about anyone else on the road.

Yep, I think that pretty much fits the definition on ‘inconsiderate’.

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Get Premium Membership
Advertisement
The-RiotACT.com Newsletter Sign Up

Images of Canberra

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.