23 September 2010

Here come the point to point cameras

| johnboy
Join the conversation
193

[First filed: Sep 21, 2010 @ 10:01]

report cover

I get a little confused about dates sometimes. But I’ve checked the calendar and it confirms today is indeed Tuesday 21 September 2010.

So I’m not quite sure what it means when TAMS says this on its website:

On Thursday 21 September 2010 the ACT Government announced that the ACT’s first point-to-point speed cameras would be installed on Hindmarsh Drive, to be operational by mid next year.

The forward design study is available and says the cameras are also good for:

    – fixed speed offences;
    – bus lane enforcement;
    – unregistered and uninsured vehicles;
    – unlicensed drivers;
    – providing traffic data to a Traffic Management Centre (TMC);
    – Road User pricing;
    – identifying vehicles associated with crime; and
    – mass surveillance.

That last might have perked some of you up. Here’s what the study has to say on mass surveillance:

P2P systems have the potential to provide data for mass surveillance applications. This application is distinguished from the Non-traffic Related Offences application described above as it is not based on the use of hotlists to define vehicles of interest. Rather it stores data (either vehicle registration and timestamp, or vehicle registration, image, and timestamp) for all vehicles passing the camera and makes it available for future interrogation.

Maybe we just have to get used to them watching our every move?

UPDATE: Mr Stanhope has now put up a media release wherein he explains why this is good for us:

“The ACT will be one of the first jurisdictions to use a network of point-to-point road safety cameras in an urban area. Ultimately, the cameras will monitor stretches of roads, entry and exit points to roads, and check for unregistered, stolen or other vehicles of interest to police using number plate recognition technology.

“The cameras are part of a suite of ACT Government measures designed to challenge the culture of speeding on Canberra’s roads, reduce road trauma and save lives.”

Join the conversation

193
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

bjnetzone said :

farnarkler said :

Oh and TAMS please, please, please set up a point to point camera on Ellenbrough St in Kaleen. You’ll make $millions.

And pretty much anywhere in Gungahlin…

William Hovell Drive could do with a few.

farnarkler said :

Oh and TAMS please, please, please set up a point to point camera on Ellenbrough St in Kaleen. You’ll make $millions.

And pretty much anywhere in Gungahlin…

shadow boxer6:07 pm 13 Oct 10

Deary me, it’s like the internet version of someones head exploding. Wouldn’t it have been easier just to write i’m sorry I did misrepresent your post and have been caught out. Now I will try and adress your points in a a sane and rational manner.

georgesgenitals4:35 pm 13 Oct 10

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Relax mate!

I’m not the one who took three attempts to say the same thing – badly.

Smile for the cameras! I know I do.

I smile because I’m not getting caught!

The three attempts thing is quite interesting. I wrote post 186, but it didn’t appear in ‘awaiting moderation mode’, so I rewrote it from memory when the page refreshed. The third post (yay I’m a three post nutbag) was because I got a giggle from your rant.

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Smile for the cameras! I know I do.

As I hope we all do. 🙂

Woody Mann-Caruso4:05 pm 13 Oct 10

You really do honestly think you’re better than everyone else, don’t you?

Just about.

Relax mate!

I’m not the one who took three attempts to say the same thing – badly.

Smile for the cameras! I know I do.

georgesgenitals2:37 pm 13 Oct 10

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

More fines, more revenue, more research showing it reduces costly crashes, more idiots whining that it isn’t fair they were only shows three enormous white signs warning them about the camera ahead. Boo f*ckin’ hoo, my heart bleeds. Oh wait, no it doesn’t – because I’ve got what I want, and get more of it every day, and the roads are safer than ever. Ha ha!

Most of us just slow down for the cameras. It’s not like we don’t know where they are (those speed vans can be spotted miles away).

Relax mate!

georgesgenitals2:29 pm 13 Oct 10

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Maybe george can tell you how many more cars we need – he doesn’t know how many there are now, and is on the record as saying he doesn’t care, but I think there’s good scope for you two to bond.

I stated that I thought it would be a good idea to use speed camera revenue to fund additional marked police cars (in response to the question that has arisen before of ‘how do you pay for them’). I said this becuase people generally curtail stupidity around marked police cars.

But thanks for another Woody-bomb to brighten a rainy afternoon.

georgesgenitals2:24 pm 13 Oct 10

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

< More police? Maybe george can tell you how many more cars we need – he doesn't know how many there are now, and is on the record as saying he doesn't care, but I think there's good scope for you two to bond.

My point, made previously, was that I thought we could use revenue generated from speed cameras to fund additional police police on our roads. The post had nothing to do with 'how many do we need', but rather expressed the view that people behave better behind the wheel when there's a visible police presence.

But thanks for another great Woody-bomb.

The above ‘on topic’ statement should have ended with “and this deserves punishment, whether by fine or other”

Jeez, Woody, I’ve just read through some of your posts on this thread – You really do honestly think you’re better than everyone else, don’t you?*

I bet you’re a hoot at parties.

Back on topic though, I do agree that being caught speeding, whether it be a patrol car, a fixed camera or a mobile speed van, is the result of stupid behaviour or not paying attention to your surroundings.

*please note: I am not sticking up for any contradictory arguments here, just making an observation.

Woody Mann-Caruso1:46 pm 13 Oct 10

totally misrepresent what I said

Let’s look at what you did say using quotes then, shall we?

I can count four of our young people who have been killed in the surrounding region in the last couple of weeks and no amount of speed cameras will stop that while the vast majority believe the current limits to slow.

Let’s begin by laying out your claims and the links between them:

– people die on the roads
– they died despite the presence of speed cameras
– you totally reckon everyone else totally reckons we should be allowed to go faster

What’s the take home message from this mismash, mr boxer? You neglect the possibility that there are people who would have died had there been no speed cameras. There’s plenty of research linked to in my many, many, many other posts on the subject that shows a clear and undeniable link between reductions in crashes, injuries and deaths and the introduction of speed cameras. You also neglect thepossibility that more cameras could have prevented these deaths. Further, you make an unstated but clearly implied postulation that, as speed cameras haven’t prevented all deaths, they must be ineffective. If you’d like to print a contrary view, and go on the record that speed cameras are effective, by all means, do so. It’d kinda make your first claim here look – well, retarded, to be frank.

As for the last bit, some advice: the next time you find yourself postulating based on ‘the majority believe’, think twice. What are the odds that the majority comprises the 50 per cent of people with above average intelligence and only a handful of idiots? Rather than ‘belief’, try ‘evidence’ from ‘experts’. See below – what evidence do you have that your eminently ‘reasonable’ limits would improve road safety? (The answer is ‘f*ck all’ – you ‘just reckon’).

What gem of wisdom did you have for us next?

A revised strategy centred around, reasonable limits, bigger points, better trasing, increasing the driving age and better, divided roads might have saved at least one of those lives.

I’ll have to admit I have no idea what ‘trasing’ is. Tracing? Training? Tasering? You’ll need to elaborate.

So, you open by claiming we need a revised strategy centred around:

– reasonable limits – what’s reasonable? Use an 80 zone as an example. What should it be? 85? 90? 95? 100? What evidence do you have that this new limit would reduce deaths, rather than simply resulting in fewer people breaking the law (or even that this latter case would even occur, given that differences in interstate limits show people will break whatever the limit is, even if it’s higher than back home?)

– bigger points – do you mean even greater penalties for speeding? But fines and points are already handled by – wait for it – speed cameras. You know, the same speed cameras you reckon don’t work, and no number of them will further reduce fatalities? How do you propose we detect people breaking these new limits? More police? Maybe george can tell you how many more cars we need – he doesn’t know how many there are now, and is on the record as saying he doesn’t care, but I think there’s good scope for you two to bond. By the way – why do you want penalties anyway? If you think we need more penalties, then that means you think speeding is dangerous – but then you’d have to be for speed cameras that catch and punish speeders. If you think speeding isn’t dangerous, then wouldn’t you want fewer penalties? What’s the big deal, right?

– increasing the driving age – because poor Mully was a teenaged P-plater. What’s that? He was 23? Well, what age do you propose we let people drive, then? 25? 30? Spit it out.

– divided roads – you mean like the one Mully died on?

But all that’s academic, because our existing road strategy is already centred on engineering and education as well as enforcement. You have read it, haven’t you?

In closing – give up. People like you have been ranting and whining for years, and guess what? The world looks more and more like I want it to every day, and less and less like you want. More speed cameras. New and better camera technology. More fines, more revenue, more research showing it reduces costly crashes, more idiots whining that it isn’t fair they were only shows three enormous white signs warning them about the camera ahead. Boo f*ckin’ hoo, my heart bleeds. Oh wait, no it doesn’t – because I’ve got what I want, and get more of it every day, and the roads are safer than ever. Ha ha!

shadow boxer1:06 pm 13 Oct 10

How does my post saying this

“A revised strategy centred around, reasonable limits, bigger points, better training, increasing the driving age and better, divided roads might have saved at least one of those lives”

equate to this summary

“Some people still die on the road, therefore speed limits, fining people for speeding and speed cameras for enforcement are an ineffective waste of time?”

And you reckon I didn’t get out of the second grade. Carry on though, i’m sure your road safety strategy will produce wonderful results over the Christmas holidays just like it did last long weekend.

shadow boxer said :

Nice post, totally misrepresent what I said, make silly analogies based on that misrepresentation and then throw an insult on the end.

Actually, I think that WMC’s post pretty much nailed it perfectly. Not an ounce of misrepresentation there at all.

The insult was pertinent, to the point, and funny (because it’s true).

shadow boxer12:11 pm 13 Oct 10

Nice post, totally misrepresent what I said, make silly analogies based on that misrepresentation and then throw an insult on the end.

Woody Mann-Caruso12:06 pm 13 Oct 10

Post #129 should cover the gist of it but I sense this is going around in circles again.

“Some people still die on the road, therefore speed limits, fining people for speeding and speed cameras for enforcement are an ineffective waste of time?” I hope you didn’t spend too long coming up with that charity case of an ‘argument’. Here, let me try:

– People still commit crimes. Police, and our legal system in general, are obviously ineffective, and should be scrapped.

– People still die of lung cancer. Regulatory controls over cigarettes should be scrapped.

– People get food poisoning all the time. I don’t care if anybody checks whether processors and retailers are maintaining appropriate hygeine standards.

– shadow boxer was allowed through the second grade. We should close all the schools.

p1 said :

ChrisinTurner said :

The most wonderful thing about all types of speed cameras is that it is completely voluntary revenue raising. Only those that want to contribute will have to pay. The more people who speed and pay this voluntary tax the less taxes I will have to pay.

I feel the same way about pokies.

Yep. Stoopid-people-tax

Thoroughly Smashed said :

Me no fry said :

ChrisinTurner said :

The most wonderful thing about all types of speed cameras is that it is completely voluntary revenue raising.

Oh God, not this fatuous argument again.

No?

No.

shadow boxer11:53 am 13 Oct 10

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Oh God, not this fatuous argument again.

Then please, refute it – because surely you’ve got something better to offer than that fatuous riposte. Show how it’s not voluntary. Show how people are forced to speed. Explain why people who break the law shouldn’t be punished. Provide alternative punishments to fines that provide a deterrent effect and are proportionate to the seriousness of the crime. You have 15 minutes of reading time, during which you may make notes on the question booklet, but not in the answer booklet.

Post #129 should cover the gist of it but I sense this is going around in circles again.

shadow boxer said :

Good thing we had those speed camera’s taxing the stupid this weekend, it would have been carnage out there otherwise….

Oh God, not this fatuous argument again.

ChrisinTurner said :

The most wonderful thing about all types of speed cameras is that it is completely voluntary revenue raising. Only those that want to contribute will have to pay. The more people who speed and pay this voluntary tax the less taxes I will have to pay.

I feel the same way about pokies.

Woody Mann-Caruso11:05 am 13 Oct 10

Oh God, not this fatuous argument again.

Then please, refute it – because surely you’ve got something better to offer than that fatuous riposte. Show how it’s not voluntary. Show how people are forced to speed. Explain why people who break the law shouldn’t be punished. Provide alternative punishments to fines that provide a deterrent effect and are proportionate to the seriousness of the crime. You have 15 minutes of reading time, during which you may make notes on the question booklet, but not in the answer booklet.

Thoroughly Smashed10:43 am 13 Oct 10

Me no fry said :

ChrisinTurner said :

The most wonderful thing about all types of speed cameras is that it is completely voluntary revenue raising.

Oh God, not this fatuous argument again.

No?

shadow boxer10:29 am 13 Oct 10

If you could now look past your nose you will see about 16 of our young people died on our roads last long weekend, lots of them innocent victims like yourself minding their own business.

Rightly or wrongly the current road safety strategy isn’t working as there is a total lack of respect for what people see as innapropriate limits and a retrospective enforcement policy that relies on the delivery of a fine notice in the mail weeks after the event.

ChrisinTurner said :

The most wonderful thing about all types of speed cameras is that it is completely voluntary revenue raising.

Oh God, not this fatuous argument again.

ChrisinTurner9:55 am 13 Oct 10

The most wonderful thing about all types of speed cameras is that it is completely voluntary revenue raising. Only those that want to contribute will have to pay. The more people who speed and pay this voluntary tax the less taxes I will have to pay.

georgesgenitals3:17 pm 08 Oct 10

Pitchka said :

georgesgenitals said :

Pitchka said :

nhand42 said :

Not happy about the mass surveillance, but very happy about the point-to-point speeding detection. I’m sick to death of bogans who think they’re being clever when they speed between cameras and slam the brakes on just before passing through them. Any authoritarian abuses brought about by these cameras are squarely on their mullet bearing heads.

Bogans, ruining society since forever.

I gather you have never exceeded the speed limit in your life? Not even whilst overtaking…

Aha, just like i thought…

Love your username. Frankly I’m amazed it was allowed, so well done!

Thanks, our user-names have something in common….

Cheers!

sorry all for the (kind-of) double-post, #164 showed (for a few minutes) as “moderated” – so I calmed it a little…

Bane said :

-In one post, Gerry said he was NOT talking about a margin of ~5kph when saying one could “feel” their speed, then in another post, he said the opposite.

No. He did not!

Please, by all means indicate the posts in which I contradicted myself.

I am quite convinced that drivers know when they have exceeded the speed limit by more than 5kmh. I am also quite convinced most drivers know within 5kmh what the speed limit feels like.

At no point did I ever say that ‘feeling’ the speed was a replacement for the speedo – merely that a driver wouldn’t have to look at the speedo any more than would otherwise be necessary.

The whole argument boils down to the fact that it is *absolutely* the responsibility of the driver to *not exceed* the speed limit. And if a driver *is* caught exceeding it – they should take responsibility for their own actions – and pay the damned fine. There is NO safety issue here.

georgesgenitals said :

Pitchka said :

nhand42 said :

Not happy about the mass surveillance, but very happy about the point-to-point speeding detection. I’m sick to death of bogans who think they’re being clever when they speed between cameras and slam the brakes on just before passing through them. Any authoritarian abuses brought about by these cameras are squarely on their mullet bearing heads.

Bogans, ruining society since forever.

I gather you have never exceeded the speed limit in your life? Not even whilst overtaking…

Aha, just like i thought…

Love your username. Frankly I’m amazed it was allowed, so well done!

Thanks, our user-names have something in common….

Bane said :

-In one post, Gerry said he was NOT talking about a margin of ~5kph when saying one could “feel” their speed, then in another post, he said the opposite. He can’t even quite figure out what his point is, so I’m surprised that you can

Umm… no. He did not.

Let me make this clear for you (ONCE AGAIN).
1) Drivers know when they are speeding (and I later clarified ‘intentionally over the speed limit’ because you drew issue to it)
2) Drivers get a feel for the speed they do. Most drivers would know the feel of their car within (that’s what tilde [~] means) 5kmh of the limit

However, feel free to point out the two posts in which I contradicted the above, by all means…

georgesgenitals2:31 pm 08 Oct 10

Pitchka said :

nhand42 said :

Not happy about the mass surveillance, but very happy about the point-to-point speeding detection. I’m sick to death of bogans who think they’re being clever when they speed between cameras and slam the brakes on just before passing through them. Any authoritarian abuses brought about by these cameras are squarely on their mullet bearing heads.

Bogans, ruining society since forever.

I gather you have never exceeded the speed limit in your life? Not even whilst overtaking…

Aha, just like i thought…

Love your username. Frankly I’m amazed it was allowed, so well done!

nhand42 said :

Not happy about the mass surveillance, but very happy about the point-to-point speeding detection. I’m sick to death of bogans who think they’re being clever when they speed between cameras and slam the brakes on just before passing through them. Any authoritarian abuses brought about by these cameras are squarely on their mullet bearing heads.

Bogans, ruining society since forever.

I gather you have never exceeded the speed limit in your life? Not even whilst overtaking…

Aha, just like i thought…

Grail said :

Bane said :

And you just said that it’s only “about slowing people who are speeding down” when you also suggested to me that I lower my speed from being ON the speed limit to a safe margin BELOW the speed limit just for the sake of the camera

It’s quite clear to me that Gerry-built’s points are simple: (a) most drivers can gauge their speed to about 5km/h of the speedo reading, (b) the cameras will ping you for doing over the posted limit, (c) if you can’t gauge your speed to within 5km/h of the limit, aim to drive slower than the limit.

You really need to ride around at the posted speed limits for a while until you become used to the feel of your bike when you are doing a sensible speed, and stop blaming car drivers for all your problems. If you can’t tell that you are doing a safe speed (and by safe, I include “safe from arbitrary law enforcement” right next to “a speed at which you are unlikely to become involved in a single vehicle accident”), you might want to consider taking music lessons. Then start to recognise the notes your bike plays (or even the temper it displays) when you’re riding at certain speeds. This is totally separate to your opinion of speed cameras.

If you need to keep looking at your speedo every five seconds to ensure you’re not speeding, you’re not a safe road user. The posted speed limit is the limit. There are no rules in Canberra about obstructing traffic by going too slow.

I know I’m going to regret dragging myself back into this pleasant little thread…but today, work is slow and your post annoys me in some ways, so here we go!

-In one post, Gerry said he was NOT talking about a margin of ~5kph when saying one could “feel” their speed, then in another post, he said the opposite. He can’t even quite figure out what his point is, so I’m surprised that you can

-Where exactly did I “blame car drivers for all my problems”?? I don’t recall mentioning car drivers at all. Sounds like you just have something against motorcyclists. Of course, I could have pointed out the countless times where constant scrutiny of the road (instead of my speedo) has saved me from being killed or seriously injured by a car driver who didn’t bother to check their blind spot before pulling out or changing lanes, and how little most of them seem to care that their moments of inattention have almost cost my life…but I didn’t

-Regarding music lessons… Ignoring for a moment that you don’t need music lessons to identify different sounds/frequencies/tempers/timbres etc, I don’t need my existing experience as either a rider or a musician to point out that this would be fraught with inaccuracies. Apart from the fact that the same speed will sound different while using different gears in different conditions, as I was trying to point out to Gerry, the speed camera won’t care if you “felt” that you were doing 58kph when you were actually doing 64kph in a 60kph zone, for eg.

To make this perfectly clear, just like everyone else, I CAN “feel” the approximate speed I am doing, but NOT to the degree of accuracy that would make me confident of avoiding a fine. If there are any superhumans here who feel otherwise about themselves, more power to you!

-I admit I have not checked this, but I would think that driving too much below the speed limit could be classed as negligent driving at the very least in certain situations. I could be wrong; it might be the case that driving at 5kph is perfectly legal since it’s below the limit…and if that’s the case, pray you don’t get stuck behind me on my bicycle on, say, the single-lane section of 80kph Athllon Drive. Or, so as not to ignite the anti-cyclist vitriol as well, how about I just cruise along there at 20kph on the motorbike?

I will slow down from the speed limit for a rush hour. And for adverse weather conditions. And for roadside accidents. And for high-risk areas like when driving past a finishing football game on a main road, to account for extra drunken foot traffic. And for any other legitimate reason. But I do not appreciate having to purposely travel slower than necessary just because there’s a camera in the vicinity. Some of you think I should do so, and that is where we shall just have to agree to disagree…

georgesgenitals said :

Let me clarify this further. There’s little doubt speed cameras cause traffic to slow in their immediate area. But I think improving driver behaviour (not just speed related) more generally would yield better results.

I agree. I also believe that if we improve everyone’s behaviour in general, we’d have fewer rapes, murders, violent assaults, robberies, vandalism and graffiti.

In the meantime a visible police presence reduces accidents, while speed cameras increase the accidents, as per the UK study I linked a dozen or so posts back.

Unmarked police cars and speed cameras are great tools for income generation. I do not believe they are helpful in terms of policing the laws or increasing road safety.

georgesgenitals said :

There’s little doubt speed cameras cause traffic to slow in their immediate area. But I think improving driver behaviour (not just speed related) more generally would yield better results.

When I first got my license, whilst I was no hoon, I regularly ignored speed limits (nothing crazy or jail-worthy). The cost of a couple of speeding fines (Officer with radar, pre-cams) very quickly changed my driving behaviour. The fines imposed on speeding drivers are a necessary deterrent – but sure, not the only tactic that should be employed.

I absolutely think fines change individual driver’s behaviour – whether there is “evidence” or not… as it 100% did in my case.

shadow boxer9:03 am 05 Oct 10

Good thing we had those speed camera’s taxing the stupid this weekend, it would have been carnage out there otherwise….

georgesgenitals8:06 pm 01 Oct 10

“My point has always been that cameras aren’t a great way to genuinely improve road user behaviour, and that experience suggests that marked police presence causes people to be a lot more careful. Of course, this opinion is not based on analysis of real data, and is not pretending to be. I deliberately suggested using speed camera revenue to fund additional marked police, because I think many people are cynical about speed cameras (despite their being some data linking their use to lower deaths), and this would be a good way to convince people (voters, that is), that their safety was actually being considered within a sensible context”

Let me clarify this further. There’s little doubt speed cameras cause traffic to slow in their immediate area. But I think improving driver behaviour (not just speed related) more generally would yield better results.

georgesgenitals7:04 pm 01 Oct 10

buzz819 said :

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Oh God, it’s george with his ‘common sense’ again. Let’s dance like we do every other time you trot out this chestnut, george:

– how many marked cars are required to act as a deterrent?
– how many marked cars are there now?
– why do you think more cars are a better deterrent than fewer, or an unknown number of cars?
– what evidence do you have that the current mix of cars and cameras is less than optimal?
– why do you think marked cars are a better deterrent than unmarked?
– why is it that you’re never able to answer these questions but you’re still convinced you’re on to a winner?

Please try to come up with something more original than another ‘I just said that to troll Woody’ backpedal – it’s gone beyond tiresome, through pathetic and into “maybe he’s really mentally retarded and I should cut him some slack?” territory.

Well, a lot of other people have said on here that more marked Police cars would lower the amount of people speeding. Like quite a few people, I think you just don’t like georgesgenitals…

They are right too. The other day I was driving down Barry Drive, I looked around and wondered why all of a sudden so many people were; indicating, driving the speed limit, not changing lanes every three seconds, not on their phones and were actually concentrating on the road, then all of a sudden I saw a marked Police car in the middle of the pack… It show’s that it does work.

I reckon we need one marked car per main street, just to drive up and down it and pull people over for breaking the law.

BUT then you have the problem of the amount of people breaking the law and getting caught declining, because they don’t want to get caught. As a direct result the amount of money made from infringement notices also decreases.

What does the government do? It says to the Police “See no big problem here, we’re spending too much money for no return, go about your business, go put up some signs saying breaking the law is bad, yes that will work.” Then the cars get taken off the road again and people start breaking the law again.

People can whinge and whine all day about the government, about the roads, about the speed limits, about the camera’s, courts, Police, what ever – At the end of the day these things are going to remain the same, what’s the point of having a coronary over something that a) is not really going to impact your life in a huge way b) your not going to be able to change, even if it did hugely change your life.

Canberra is the place that keeps electing Mr Stanhope, as a result we have to keep living by his rules.

Here’s a question for you all:
If you know where the speed camera’s are, and you follow the speed limit anyway, why are you upset that the government is putting up these camera’s? (I don’t want to hear about the road safety campaign -the law says don’t speed, kind of like, don’t kill people, break into their houses, bash people, rape people and look at child pornography, you wont do any of that, so why speed?)

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Oh God, it’s george with his ‘common sense’ again. Let’s dance like we do every other time you trot out this chestnut, george:

– how many marked cars are required to act as a deterrent?
– how many marked cars are there now?
– why do you think more cars are a better deterrent than fewer, or an unknown number of cars?
– what evidence do you have that the current mix of cars and cameras is less than optimal?
– why do you think marked cars are a better deterrent than unmarked?
– why is it that you’re never able to answer these questions but you’re still convinced you’re on to a winner?

Please try to come up with something more original than another ‘I just said that to troll Woody’ backpedal – it’s gone beyond tiresome, through pathetic and into “maybe he’s really mentally retarded and I should cut him some slack?” territory.

It’s obvious you don’t like me, and don’t expect me to jump through your hoops. However, this is a better response than the pathetic personal attacks you often make.

My point has always been that cameras aren’t a great way to genuinely improve road user behaviour, and that experience suggests that marked police presence causes people to be a lot more careful. Of course, this opinion is not based on analysis of real data, and is not pretending to be. I deliberately suggested using speed camera revenue to fund additional marked police, because I think many people are cynical about speed cameras (despite their being some data linking their use to lower deaths), and this would be a good way to convince people (voters, that is), that their safety was actually being considered within a sensible context.

“why is it that you’re never able to answer these questions but you’re still convinced you’re on to a winner?”

Please link the thread(s) where you asked this list of questions to me previously.

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Oh God, it’s george with his ‘common sense’ again. Let’s dance like we do every other time you trot out this chestnut, george:

– how many marked cars are required to act as a deterrent?
– how many marked cars are there now?
– why do you think more cars are a better deterrent than fewer, or an unknown number of cars?
– what evidence do you have that the current mix of cars and cameras is less than optimal?
– why do you think marked cars are a better deterrent than unmarked?
– why is it that you’re never able to answer these questions but you’re still convinced you’re on to a winner?

Please try to come up with something more original than another ‘I just said that to troll Woody’ backpedal – it’s gone beyond tiresome, through pathetic and into “maybe he’s really mentally retarded and I should cut him some slack?” territory.

Well, a lot of other people have said on here that more marked Police cars would lower the amount of people speeding. Like quite a few people, I think you just don’t like georgesgenitals…

They are right too. The other day I was driving down Barry Drive, I looked around and wondered why all of a sudden so many people were; indicating, driving the speed limit, not changing lanes every three seconds, not on their phones and were actually concentrating on the road, then all of a sudden I saw a marked Police car in the middle of the pack… It show’s that it does work.

I reckon we need one marked car per main street, just to drive up and down it and pull people over for breaking the law.

BUT then you have the problem of the amount of people breaking the law and getting caught declining, because they don’t want to get caught. As a direct result the amount of money made from infringement notices also decreases.

What does the government do? It says to the Police “See no big problem here, we’re spending too much money for no return, go about your business, go put up some signs saying breaking the law is bad, yes that will work.” Then the cars get taken off the road again and people start breaking the law again.

People can whinge and whine all day about the government, about the roads, about the speed limits, about the camera’s, courts, Police, what ever – At the end of the day these things are going to remain the same, what’s the point of having a coronary over something that a) is not really going to impact your life in a huge way b) your not going to be able to change, even if it did hugely change your life.

Canberra is the place that keeps electing Mr Stanhope, as a result we have to keep living by his rules.

Here’s a question for you all:
If you know where the speed camera’s are, and you follow the speed limit anyway, why are you upset that the government is putting up these camera’s? (I don’t want to hear about the road safety campaign -the law says don’t speed, kind of like, don’t kill people, break into their houses, bash people, rape people and look at child pornography, you wont do any of that, so why speed?)

yay more surveillance. big brother is everywhere

so with this year looking like it’s going to be the biggest year for deaths on our roads, why are we still putting in speed cameras? they’ve been around for how long now? and looking at statistics, it shows that it doesn’t do a damn thing to make our roads safer. instead of blatantly raising revenue, why not try a different approach? do something that will actually make roads safer.

Woody Mann-Caruso8:40 pm 28 Sep 10

Oh God, it’s george with his ‘common sense’ again. Let’s dance like we do every other time you trot out this chestnut, george:

– how many marked cars are required to act as a deterrent?
– how many marked cars are there now?
– why do you think more cars are a better deterrent than fewer, or an unknown number of cars?
– what evidence do you have that the current mix of cars and cameras is less than optimal?
– why do you think marked cars are a better deterrent than unmarked?
– why is it that you’re never able to answer these questions but you’re still convinced you’re on to a winner?

Please try to come up with something more original than another ‘I just said that to troll Woody’ backpedal – it’s gone beyond tiresome, through pathetic and into “maybe he’s really mentally retarded and I should cut him some slack?” territory.

How about a few more unmarked police cars? There’s a nice green Commodore ute which does the rounds. Just the look of it would tempt a few morons to drag it.

georgesgenitals said :

What about quarantining the revenue from traffic infringements, including speed cameras, and using it to supplement additional marked police patrols? If fines really are a tax on the stupid, how about we use their money to help control them?

Stop it George, you are using common sense, and putting up probably the best post in this thread.

georgesgenitals3:30 pm 28 Sep 10

What about quarantining the revenue from traffic infringements, including speed cameras, and using it to supplement additional marked police patrols? If fines really are a tax on the stupid, how about we use their money to help control them?

shadow boxer3:28 pm 28 Sep 10

sirocco said :

Shadow Boxer, you are right, there should be more done to instill in young drivers a better driving attitude but this should not be an either/or situation. Why not have these cameras as well, it is one of the few times I feel that “you’ve nothing to fear if you’re not doing anything wrong” (I’m usually a bit concerned when this is used as an excuse to sacrifice freedoms and privacy)

Thanks Sirocco, It’s all good and I wasn’t having a shot at you, when I was young and learning to drive the game was avoiding the RBT. I think that message is finally sinking in.

BTW I dont have a huge issue with cameras per se, just the limits they are enforcing.

Shadow Boxer, you are right, there should be more done to instill in young drivers a better driving attitude but this should not be an either/or situation. Why not have these cameras as well, it is one of the few times I feel that “you’ve nothing to fear if you’re not doing anything wrong” (I’m usually a bit concerned when this is used as an excuse to sacrifice freedoms and privacy)

Kiron123 said :

– War On Drugs, Millions thrown away every year at yet Australia has the highest amount of illicit substance users per capita in the world.

That’s not even vaguely true.

Woody Mann-Caruso12:12 pm 28 Sep 10

What would also help is a general community attitude that speeding is wrong and unacceptable

The general community attitude is already that speeding is wrong. It’s also that ‘speeding’ is when other people drive faster than you. You’re in the right hand lane behind somebody on 85 and you want to do 90? Then you’re just doing a reasonable speed and the guy in front is an idiot who needs to get back in the left lane already. Somebody comes up behind you wanting to do 95? He’s reckless and is going to kill somebody one day.

People will still speed even with increased limits: they’re not driving what they reckon is a fair speed, they just think they’re special and they want to drive faster than everybody else, to get one car ahead. People who do 120 in Queensland will do 130 in NSW will do 150 in the NT because they’re special snowflakes. And if we changed all the 80s to 100s tomorrow they’d want to do 120 because they did a lap in a V8 once on their birthday and cars now aren’t like cars were then and they know what they’re doing and when their mates got killed in a stormwater drain well they just need to improve that road bloody government.

and booking people at 65kn/h down anzac parade because people see it for what it is.

What, illegal?

shadow boxer12:00 pm 28 Sep 10

Yeh you are probably right, it just annoys me to see the current laws treated as a joke by the vast majority of the population.

I’ve seen the older kids at my daughters school having a laugh about getting a ticket and sharing around the points so they don’t lose their licences “Hey brother can you spare two points”.

The whole community attitude needs to change and I cant see that happening by a constant lowering of the limits or bills in the mail a few weeks later. The limits need to reflect community standards.

I’ll be quiet now i’ve probably banged on enough

Yes, shadow boxer, it would be nice to have a good deal more police on the roads, a more thorough system of driver training before people get their licenses, and improved road conditions, *as well as* speed cameras and everything we already have now.

However, as has been pointed out time and time again, instituting these sorts of changes is very expensive and a significant hike in taxes would be required in order to pay for them.

Unfortunately, whenever a hike in taxes is mentioned, lots of people (oddly enough, these are usually the same people who whinge about speed cameras being ‘revenue raising’) squeal like a bunch of stuck piggies, so nothing gets done.

shadow boxer11:28 am 28 Sep 10

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

she just doesn’t have the situational awareness or understand the consequences well enough

But turning all our 80 zones into 100s will fix that, right?

No, if you read what I said, better training at an older age and improved roads will fix that. What would also help is a general community attitude that speeding is wrong and unacceptable, that is not going to happen by simply lowering the limits all the time and booking people at 65kn/h down anzac parade because people see it for what it is.

Sirocco’s post above is a really, really good example of why the current system doesn’t work, it relies on after the event punishments rather than instilling the correct attitudes and training up front, he/she is lucky that they survivued that initial flurry of driving but too many are not…

I have recently finished a road trip and used my sat nav as a tool on my journey..nice toy but it also has a side bar telling me my speed and time of arrival etc.. But my speedo did not match the speed that the Sat Nav had in its little calculations. ie at 110 on my speedo I was doing 98 on my sat nav. It was accurate around 60 kilometers but going faster the difference was marked..

So whats right the Sat Nav or the speedo and if the Sat nav is then if you set your cruise control to 110 then your speedo has you doing 120.

What is the measurement on these cameras?? Are they using GPS. What will the nice Policeman say when you explain I used the Sat Nav to set my speed on my Cruise Control.

My car is 12 months old and I had the speedo checked on my last service and they agreed it was out. Apparently most speedo’s are.

I have a also been to Victoria and noticed the Point to Point cameras. My answer was to not use the freeway and see some of the country side. I had a much better trip and actually saw some of the State and ate in places that did a nice lunch etc..

I think the Freeway is boring and you speed to hurry up and get off it asap..

Woody Mann-Caruso10:57 am 28 Sep 10

she just doesn’t have the situational awareness or understand the consequences well enough

But turning all our 80 zones into 100s will fix that, right?

Actually, if this revenue pays for the public installation art that we see on the sides of Canberra’s roads then keep speeding a little bit, I kinda like it.

If this is a “revenue raising” exercise then people here seem to forget that it is a voluntary fools’ tax (like the lotto); by speeding you choose to be taxed.

I’ve lost my licence in the past through accumulation of speeding fines and I have both recognised that it was my own fault and changed my driving habits to not loose it again. The system does work in slowing drivers down.

If you don’t want to pay a fine then slow down; we’ll all be a lot safer.

shadow boxer8:38 am 28 Sep 10

farnarkler said :

If young people are stupid enough to drive too fast for the conditions or in cars too powerful for their owner’s abilities or in cars that have worn brakes, steering, etc then don’t ask me to feel sorry for them when they crash and die. It’s just a less ingenious way to win a Darwin awards.

Shadow boxer you seem to think that road rules are some sort of democracy. They’re not. Like I said before, Ellenborough Street used to be 80km/h now it’s 60 km/h. Do I think it’s helped to reduce the limit? No I don’t but as it is the limit.

By your logic if 80% of drivers say the blood/alcohol limit would be fair and reasonable to be 0.1 then that would be the limit.

I doubt 80% of people think that or routinely break the DUI laws every day, as I said lets hope it’s not your family or friends who get wiped out by a driver that is too young, has not been sufficiently trained, is driving on a road lacking proper verges and physical seperation from oncoming traffic and sees beating the speed camera’s as some sort of game to talk about with his or her mates.

The poor family at the Broulee turn off got the short straw recently. That is a terrible intersection and our road safety money would be much better spent fixing that road.

My brother in law cuts people out of cars for a living in the ACT Fire Brigade and while he swears by air bags your Mercedes will not always protect you from the outside world even if you personally manage to avoid the fines. You need to see the bigger picture here.

My 15 year old gets her P’s shortly and I can tell you while she may be acedemicaly very smart and is a sensible kid she is nowhere near ready to be making life and death decisions on the roads, she just doesn’t have the situational awareness or understand the consequences well enough.

shadow boxer said :

Kids mimic the general community attitude

that isn’t all though – the problem with a great number of teens is they see themselves as invincible and untouchable… that, and they start out with no experience. Only time fixes that issue…

Woody Mann-Caruso9:00 pm 27 Sep 10

No its not all good at all

Yeah mate it totally is all good

Thankfully I drive the result of many millions of Deutschmarks invested by Mercedes so I feel a hell of a lot safer than 90% of cars on the road today.

If young people are stupid enough to drive too fast for the conditions or in cars too powerful for their owner’s abilities or in cars that have worn brakes, steering, etc then don’t ask me to feel sorry for them when they crash and die. It’s just a less ingenious way to win a Darwin awards.

Shadow boxer you seem to think that road rules are some sort of democracy. They’re not. Like I said before, Ellenborough Street used to be 80km/h now it’s 60 km/h. Do I think it’s helped to reduce the limit? No I don’t but as it is the limit.

By your logic if 80% of drivers say the blood/alcohol limit would be fair and reasonable to be 0.1 then that would be the limit.

shadow boxer8:04 pm 27 Sep 10

farnarkler said :

It’s all good. Those who speed will pay, simple as.

No its not all good at all, the current strategy does nothing to stop our young people wrapping themselves around a tree or wiping out my or your family at a t-intersection. Avoiding the speed cameras is currently seen by young people as a game.

Our approach to road safety needs to fundamentally change and that needs to start with road rules that are seen by 80% of drivers as fair and reasonable rather then the opposite which is currently the case.

Speeding will then become socially unacceptable and more punishable. better learner training at an older age would also help.

Woody Mann-Caruso7:01 pm 27 Sep 10

Simply revenue raising, disguised as ’safety’.

Awesome, isn’t it? Stupid people do stupid shit and smart people like me get to take their money! I reckon it’s fully grouse.

Little has been said about the one factor which dictates the financial return to Govco (I reject ANY road safety benefit from these things).

Speed limits set 10kph higher than current would more accurately reflect the 85th percentile speed of the traffic on most of the roads selected for these moneyspinners.

How is the 100K limit on the single lane Fairbairn Ave east of the airport, with at least 4 rural type intersections in about 1.5k’s considered correct when compared with the 80k limit on the 2-3 lane (in each direction) of Hindmarsh Drive? The 90k limit on the Majura Lane goat track with the 4 lane 80k Monaro Highway from the Hume Hilton to Rose Cottage roundabout, with 1 traffic light controlled intersection in each direction and lengthy merging lanes?

Some public servant has been tasked with establishing these limits, and I suspect the return to Gov would be a major factor in deciding the limit imposed.

Simply revenue raising, disguised as ‘safety’.

It’s all good. Those who speed will pay, simple as.

shadow boxer3:57 pm 27 Sep 10

I think the point some of us are trying to make before we vget shouted down by the “drvie slower and you wont get booked” folks is the current road safety strategy is seriously flawed.

I can count four of our young people who have been killed in the surrounding region in the last couple of weeks and no amount of speed cameras will stop that while the vast majority believe the current limits to slow. Kids mimic the general community attitude and a speeding ticket is currently seen as an inconvenience stemming from ridiculous limits and the Gov’t’s need for the $1bn a year it makes from speed camera’s.

A revised strategy centred around, reasonable limits, bigger points, better trasing, increasing the driving age and better, divided roads might have saved at least one of those lives.

Bane said :

And you just said that it’s only “about slowing people who are speeding down” when you also suggested to me that I lower my speed from being ON the speed limit to a safe margin BELOW the speed limit just for the sake of the camera

It’s quite clear to me that Gerry-built’s points are simple: (a) most drivers can gauge their speed to about 5km/h of the speedo reading, (b) the cameras will ping you for doing over the posted limit, (c) if you can’t gauge your speed to within 5km/h of the limit, aim to drive slower than the limit.

You really need to ride around at the posted speed limits for a while until you become used to the feel of your bike when you are doing a sensible speed, and stop blaming car drivers for all your problems. If you can’t tell that you are doing a safe speed (and by safe, I include “safe from arbitrary law enforcement” right next to “a speed at which you are unlikely to become involved in a single vehicle accident”), you might want to consider taking music lessons. Then start to recognise the notes your bike plays (or even the temper it displays) when you’re riding at certain speeds. This is totally separate to your opinion of speed cameras.

If you need to keep looking at your speedo every five seconds to ensure you’re not speeding, you’re not a safe road user. The posted speed limit is the limit. There are no rules in Canberra about obstructing traffic by going too slow.

but on subject… it’s not hard to do the speed limit.. im sure there are better ways the gov could be spending taxpayers money, but if it saves just one life, it’s worth it.. If you aren’t doing the wrong thing, then there is no need for concern. There is always a few km’s leighway so no need to get paranoid over 2 or 3 kms over. Just don’t speed. Simple! And if you can’t comprehend that then get off our roads! And as for an earlier post about the sun in your eyes, and adjusting etc etc… YOU should not be driving!

Bane said :

That’s where I got that from.

Again… how is that a contradiction? I clearly spelled out that in my posts, I used ‘Speeding’ to indicate the driver was aware of the excessive speed they were intentionally doing, whilst I believe most drivers know, within 5kmh, the speed they are traveling at. If you are not one of these, I maintain that you are in the minority – though I would happily stand corrected if anyone else wants to argue that point.

Bane said :

you can’t not be “sure if that makes you ‘extra special'” while also claiming “Of course, I AM a very good driver”.

You’ll also note the sarcasm from the emoticon… feeding directly into the “of course, I’m a good driver” posts on RA (which someone had already mentioned)… I actually think I’m average at driving… no hoon, but no Sunday Driver either…

Bane said :

it’s only “about slowing people who are speeding down” when you also suggested to me that I lower my speed from being ON the speed limit to a safe margin BELOW the speed limit just for the sake of the camera

…the suggestion was if you cannot tell if you are speeding, you should slow so you know you are not exceeding the limit. You suggested you can’t judge if you are just over the limit – so I offered a reasonable suggestion. If you can’t judge “the limit”, drive so you know you are not exceeding it – at least THAT isn’t against the Law.

Bane said :

Anyway, my opinion on p2p cameras hasn’t changed, and more than likely won’t, and this is going to start going around in circles

I’m not trying to change your mind. I’m offering an opinion partially in contradiction to yours.

I’m not immune to speeding – I have had 3 speeding fines (two well under 15kmh, one in the second range for 20 over) in my 15+ years of driving – but I have never tried to argue them. I accept responsibility for my actions – which seemed such a relief to the Officers that pulled me over on those occasions.

I still maintain people *know* when they are speeding… and most drivers know when they are at about the appropriate speed (which a quick look at the speedo will confirm). Whilst some drivers might get pinged on P2P for ~5kmh, it is more than likely going to be the exception rather than the rule… Remember, overall, that the posted speed limit – as, as the name suggests… a “limit”…

Jim Jones said :

Wah wah wah, I can’t drive at the speed limit, it’s too hard, wah wah wah

That pretty much sums it up, really!

I’ve received two speeding tickets in my 18-odd years of driving (currently 35 years-old). The first one was when I was 19 and driving like a dickhead. The second one was when I was about 28 and heading down the coast after a really bad week at work. I got stuck behind a car driving about 15-20 km/h below the speed limit (it was dark and raining) and eventually I decided to see what my new sports car could do, and I overtook the slow-driving car at about 150 kph (in a 100 kph zone). I received a fine for about $1000.

To summarise: i’ve received two speeding tickets in my life. Both times I was driving like a dickhead.

bigred said :

Suggest that you read the blurb attached to the media release tooks. By the way, AFP has received plenty of extra money over recent years. Its not spent on the street plod, its spent on a never ending burgeoning of the executive.

You don’t know how a budget works, do you? Yep, the AFP do receive a lot of money. Guess where most of it goes – national operations. Educate yourself before coming out with gibberish.

And I still can’t see where it says RAPID is being wound back. Seems strange since they’ve increased the number of RAPID vehicles this year (spending lots of money doing so). Or are you just assuming they’ll be wound back because the P2P cameras will eventually have number plate recognition technology?

Wah wah wah, I can’t drive at the speed limit, it’s too hard, wah wah wah

Gerry-Built said :

Drivers know when they are SPEEDING (ie excessively exceeding the speed limit). Most drivers know what 50, 60, 80 and 100km/h “feel” like and know if they are exceeding that (I’m not talking ~5 km/h).

I’m pretty certain most people could judge easily ~5kmh

That’s where I got that from. You’re starting to contradict yourself. No matter how “pretty certain” you think you are, they can’t both be true

Also, you can’t not be “sure if that makes you ‘extra special'” while also claiming “Of course, I AM a very good driver”. You’ve already called yourself special…

And you just said that it’s only “about slowing people who are speeding down” when you also suggested to me that I lower my speed from being ON the speed limit to a safe margin BELOW the speed limit just for the sake of the camera

Anyway, my opinion on p2p cameras hasn’t changed, and more than likely won’t, and this is going to start going around in circles

Bane said :

According to you, “most” drivers can’t tell their speed within 5kms,

exactly where do you get that from? I said most drivers *can* tell if they are speeding – and then later spelled out what I meant by “speeding” (ie knowing in excess of the speed limit) because you needed it spelled out for you. And OMG – when did I say a speedo was NOT required FFS?

I made it clear I think most drivers know what 40, 60 etc “feels” like… and therefore know when they are *in excess* of that speed.

I’m pretty certain most people could judge easily ~5kmh, with only an occasion glance at the speedo as verification. If you can’t; I’m not sure if that makes me “extra special”, or you a really poor driver, perhaps the Hive Mind can throw some light on that…

Bane said :

Isn’t this supposed to be about increasing safety, rather than just slowing people down for the hell of it?

I would suggest it is about slowing people *who are speeding* down… People doing the appropriate speed can continue as always.

The Traineediplomat12:29 am 24 Sep 10

If we all travel by the well serviced, well rounded and remarkable light-rail system we would never get a speeding ticket…….oh…..wait….

kirium said :

My favourite part of the report…

When I throw that thru my tried and tested Bureaucratic Bullshit Translator™ the translation is something like this:

“The general public would be outraged if we were honest and upfront about this, but this system will be a licence to print money”

Then stick it to the Government. Stick it to them real bad.

Make sure you always travel a minimum of 5 kilometres UNDER the speed limit.

That’ll stop any revenue.

: )

More MARKED cars on the road 24/7 booking (and seen to be booking by others) drivers who do the wrong thing is the answer.

A MARKED police car can be as stationary or as mobile as the occupants wish it to be.

Stick your cameras where the flash don’t shine…

screaming banshee9:12 pm 23 Sep 10

In an ideal world there would be sufficient voluntary taxes that mandatory taxes would no longer be required.

My favourite part of the report… Last paragraph of the Executive Summary (so it’s the last thing that anyone like Stanhope would read).

“The revenue from infringement notices has been excluded from the Cost Benefit Analysis on the grounds that the system must be justified from a road safety perspective. However, analysis suggests that depending upon traffic volumes and infringement rates the revenue from infringement notices are likely to repay the capital costs of the roadside infrastructure in under 12 months.”

When I throw that thru my tried and tested Bureaucratic Bullshit Translator™ the translation is something like this:

“The general public would be outraged if we were honest and upfront about this, but this system will be a licence to print money”

bigred said :

So tooks, why do we need P2P cameras? Why do AFT want to wind back the rapid units (which I fully support)? Because automation means they don’t actually have to do anything. I note most petrol head lobbyists suggest a uniformed copper in a marked car is a very effective tool at improving behaviour. A fine in the mail at a later date removes the behaviour from the penalty.

And here I was thinking that only a couple of months ago they were saying that were getting ready to deploy more RAPID units… Where has it been said that they are winding it back?

Gerry-Built said :

-We’re not talking about “excessive” speeds. You don’t have to be speeding excessively to be fined
-According to you, “most” drivers can’t tell their speed within 5kms, “I’m not talking ~5 km/h”, but you can “judge perfectly almost always” because you’re apparently extra special. Most of us though, saddled as we are with our less than infallible perceptions of speed, prefer to rely on the speedo. Particularly since a 5kph margin of error is enough to get a fine
-I’m not worried about my safety now (well, any more than normal). It’s the introduction of a p2p camera that would reduce the existing safety by making my exact speed at each moment more of a concern for me at the time than it should be. So you suggest I compensate by driving notably slower than the speed limit, for no reason other than the presence of the camera? Isn’t this supposed to be about increasing safety, rather than just slowing people down for the hell of it?

In the end though, I don’t think the cameras are justified in the first place, and you do. All this talk about how to judge your speed after they’re installed is beside the point; apart from revenue-raising, they are of little use in my opinion

Suggest that you read the blurb attached to the media release tooks. By the way, AFP has received plenty of extra money over recent years. Its not spent on the street plod, its spent on a never ending burgeoning of the executive.

Oh, BTW – driving around a lot as I have today, I was very aware to “feel” my speed. I am very much aware of when I’ve gone even a few km/h over the limit… 40kmh I can judge perfectly almost always… I am a couple off at 80km/h (certainly more accurate than my cruise control)…

Of course, I *am* a very good driver…

😉

Bane said :

“Feeling” your speed is NOT accurate enough to avoid a fine…

And if feeling your speed is so damn accurate, why do we have speedos at all?

OMG – do I have to SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU!

Drivers know when they are SPEEDING (ie excessively exceeding the speed limit). Most drivers know what 50, 60, 80 and 100km/h “feel” like and know if they are exceeding that (I’m not talking ~5 km/h).

We have speedos because they are accurate (enough). If a cop were to give you a fine for 61kmh in a 60kmh zone – you could almost certainly successfully dispute it – which is probably why they don’t waste the time to do it (often) – I wasn’t taking about replacing/removing speedos, simply that most drivers are aware enough of monitoring their driving by feel not to need to look at the speedo ever few seconds. If you are that worried about your safety, drive so you KNOW that you are below the speed limit – not trying to stick dead on it by watching the dial because you are not aware enough of your vehicle… with a little bit of practice, even you (with your obvious lack of visual sensation) might be able to stick close to the speed limit by feel.

bigred said :

So tooks, why do we need P2P cameras? Why do AFT want to wind back the rapid units (which I fully support)? Because automation means they don’t actually have to do anything. I note most petrol head lobbyists suggest a uniformed copper in a marked car is a very effective tool at improving behaviour. A fine in the mail at a later date removes the behaviour from the penalty.

Short answer: we don’t need P2P cameras.

Why do AFT (whoever they are) want to wind back rapid units? I wasn’t aware they did want to. Source?

Yep, more cops on the road would be a great idea, but who’s going to pay for them? Like ’em or not, speed cameras are a never-ending source of revenue – that’s why the government loves them.

“the Drug issue could easily be dealt with years ago if we took a different approach too”

Ah the lolz never stop around here.

Maybe not the camera issue, but other issues that I mentioned yes, they are useless police PR exercises, and in a way this have every part to do with policing as it does useless Government revenue raising.
The Police have no presence at all on the roads, if they did, I’m sure I wouldn’t be cut off or run off the road so many times by the “perfectly fine” Canberra drivers.

The Police and the Government spend all their time trying to fix the symptoms of a problem than the problem itself, hell the Drug issue could easily be dealt with years ago if we took a different approach too it but oh no, after 30 years and millions if not billions of dollars down the drain I think if we just throw more money at it, it will just go away, it’s the same with driving as well I think, you see, Speed Cameras are magical devices that actually stop people from being bad drivers and magically teach everyone how to merge into traffic and form one lane during peak hour, so if anything, we should stick them everywhere, because wherever a Speed Camera is, bad drivers don’t exist!

“The Government and Police caring more about a useless RP exercise or Revenue Raising than actually solving a problem? no really? Oh do not tell me so!.”

Dear Kiron

Are you 100% sure the Police are running the P2P cameras?
100%?

Do some reading

Gerry-Built said :

Bane said :

“Feeling” what speed you are going is hardly accurate.

It is well and truly accurate enough to know you are not speeding. The Authorities build in an “error margin” that is more than enough for covering any error of perception. If you can’t judge your speed – you really should not be driving.

Well, first of all the error margin is there to accommodate the error margin of speedos, not humans. Not to mention that everyone has a different idea/guess of what the margin is. And the fact that I’ve seen more that one cop quoted as saying that if the radar says you were doing 61kph in a 60kph zone, they could book you if they really wanted to.

But besides that, you’re still just wrong. “Feeling” your speed is NOT accurate enough to avoid a fine. You might be able to feel that you’re doing “about 60kph”, but how do you know you’re doing, say, 58kph instead of 64kph? You don’t! And if it’s the latter in a 60kph zone, then it’s a fine for you.

And if feeling your speed is so damn accurate, why do we have speedos at all?

The Government and Police caring more about a useless RP exercise or Revenue Raising than actually solving a problem? no really? Oh do not tell me so!.

– War On Drugs, Millions thrown away every year at yet Australia has the highest amount of illicit substance users per capita in the world.
– Alcohol violence, we spend millions on combating stoners, yet this one seems to be swept under the rug. Where was it, Sydney where clubs got together and said they wanted more police presence inside and around the clubbing districts and Police said “Lol no”? Oh and then Operation Waste of time where the Police think their presence around for one weekend will actually stop anything any other weekend of the year.
– Road Fatalities, lets get rid of any police presence on the road and replace them with Speed Cameras on roads where there is very little accidents! despite I have been run off the road several times by people trying to undertake me in form one lanes, I’m sure these speed cameras will really solve that problem!

Alot of the suggested sites (and other arterial roads) in the ACT feel like you are crawling along them going the Speed Limit. Why is Adelaide Ave an 80 zone with no bus stops, 3 Lanes + a Transit, no Traffic lights and no intersections?
Instead of looking at the problem of WHY I HAVE NEVER SEEN SOMEONE DO THE SPEED LIMIT ON THAT ROAD, lets just fill that up with Speed Cameras, I’m sure that will fix any problem!

Thoroughly Smashed said :

How often do you find yourself over the speed limit when you look at your speedometer?

You’re missing the point entirely: if I know my speed is being constantly monitored by p2p cameras, then I will be constantly monitoring my speed in order to avoid a fine. I don’t want to risk making an involuntary donation. Don’t your eyes ever flick down to the speedo when you’re about to pass a fixed camera? Well, now that will happen for a solid few kms

Bane said :

And how do you know the other person is watching their speedo anyway?

You don’t. But having undertaken the previous operation of judging your own speed, and having access to a mildly accurate speed reading through the little dialy thing on your dask, you just might be OK. Have some responsibilityt for your own actions.

Thoroughly Smashed11:49 am 23 Sep 10

Me no fry said :

Define constant.

Does http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/constant help?

Me no fry said :

Even a car on cruise control can drive at slightly different speeds due to slight differences in the terrain.

Sure, but cruise control is an aid, not an excuse to pay no attention to your speed.

Me no fry said :

Being able to maintain an exact speed (whatever it is) for extended periods of time is a pretty useless skill, in my opinion – albeit a driving skill that seems to be all that the government requires of you on a day to day basis.

Certainly it’s less important than paying attention to what’s happening around you, but that doesn’t make it useless. It also contributes to smoother flow of traffic.

Bane said :

“Feeling” what speed you are going is hardly accurate.

It is well and truly accurate enough to know you are not speeding. The Authorities build in an “error margin” that is more than enough for covering any error of perception. If you can’t judge your speed – you really should not be driving.

UK study shows that speed cameras increase traffic accidents by 31%, P2P cameras increase accidents by 6.7%. Even worse, cameras used to enforce construction zone speed limits increase the accident rate by 55% (even though the difference between normal and construction site accidents without cameras is less than 1%). To my naive perspective, this indicates that speed cameras distract drivers from their main function, which is to drive safely.

The same study shows that visible police patrols reduce traffic accidents by 10%.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/06/602.asp

Now for you folks who think that speeding in Canberra will get you to your destination faster, let me assure you that I stick to the speed limit (except where traffic is going slower than the speed limit), and I regularly end up pulling up beside the speeding drivers at every set of traffic lights from Isabella Plains to Dickson. That’s a 30km trip, over which the speeding drivers gain no advantage even though they are travelling up to half as fast again as the speed limit allows and changing lanes every time they see a four metre gap between cars.

I’ll post a video as soon as I can figure out how to keep my camera mounted and keep the windscreen clean 🙂 The message remains though – speeding isn’t going to make up for lost time. Leave on time in order to arrive on time.

troll-sniffer10:31 am 23 Sep 10

If I had the time and the serious inclination, which is fast approaching I might add, i would like to have a mechanic install a 40km/hr limiter into my car, so that no matter hwere I went I couldn’t ever break any of the multitude of speed limits around this increasingly intrusive city.

No doubt some pube with little else to occupy his vacant mind would then draft legislation to enforce minimum point to point speeds to deal with troublemakers like moi!

Anyone noticed the upsurge in unasked for and unrequested civil surveillance
over the last years coinciding with John Hargreaves having any say on the matter?This latest unnecessary and draconian affront won’t be the last. Technology will get more sophisticated as will methods of keeping any eye on all of us. Unless the citizenry forcibly objects. Thomm Hartmann, the american author and talk show host, defines a conservative as one who has a basic mistrust of human nature, sees it as fundamentally selfish and believes laws are all that stop us from descending into barbarism. A liberal ( progressive, in our parlance) believes that human nature is basically sound and laws firm up community standards but are there for the aberrant minority, not the majority of reasonable people . In this definition ,Hargreaves, who aggressively pushed for the introduction of speed cameras is a blue ribbon conservative. There are more deaths by suicide than road accidents . Realistically, how much safer can our roads get while we individually pilot 1.5 tonne lumps of steel as our preferred mode of transport. Speed cameras are brought to us from the same fear based ideology that spawned the patriot act, enhanced border protection, tasers and other blights on our democracy and credibility. Contact your local legislative assembly member and tell them to stick their public nuisance cameras in their own backyards.

Thoroughly Smashed said :

Should I add that I don’t like point to point cameras any more than the rest of you, I just think that being unable to maintain a constant speed while in control of a motor vehicle is an argument formed from so many varieties of animal manure.

Define constant. Even a car on cruise control can drive at slightly different speeds due to slight differences in the terrain. Being able to maintain an exact speed (whatever it is) for extended periods of time is a pretty useless skill, in my opinion – albeit a driving skill that seems to be all that the government requires of you on a day to day basis.

georgesgenitals9:43 am 23 Sep 10

Let’s make the speed limit 20km/h. Then, when accidents happen, deaths will be very unlikely.

These cameras are pure revenue raising.

Thoroughly Smashed9:18 am 23 Sep 10

Should I add that I don’t like point to point cameras any more than the rest of you, I just think that being unable to maintain a constant speed while in control of a motor vehicle is an argument formed from so many varieties of animal manure.

Thoroughly Smashed9:13 am 23 Sep 10

Bane said :

Thoroughly Smashed said :

If you need to spend more than a fraction of a second a few times a minute to monitor your speedometer, please go down to the ACT Government Shopfront and turn in your licence.

5 times a week, I have to travel home heading west into the setting sun. It takes up to a few seconds for my eyes to adjust when I look down, and another few when I look back up. I’ve done what I can to reduce the problem; I wear sunglasses, but my helmet doesn’t have a sun visor, funnily enough. If there was a point-to-point camera along that stretch, I would feel compelled to continually look down to ensure I wouldn’t get fined. And this is improving my safety?

How often do you find yourself over the speed limit when you look at your speedometer?

An additional money spinner will be the fines mailed out to owners of vehicles deemed to have ‘illegible’ or faded number plates.

And even more bucks for the replacement plates!

The Soviet may even be able to reduce property taxes 😛

Deano said :

From the report:
Potentially, the ANPR cameras used in a P2P system could, in the future, be used to support road tolling, road user charging, and congestion charging schemes.

Governments will love the idea of use-based charging, pretty sure the Greens want it brought in, but it is already here – in the form of petrol taxes. The more we drive, the more tax we pay… so don’t them them also bring in road-use charges via cameras (except for fancy new motorways like Sydney’s M7).

I fear these cameras will create an accident zone 1km before each 2nd camera as people slow waaaaay down to make sure they’re under the time to go through, either that or we’ll create a network of rat-runs as motorists avoid cameras.

deye said :

I see two things happening.
1) people will drive at high speed through the first camera, and stop just before the second until the time limit runs out, then drive past – just because they can.

2) The cameras are going to need to be repaired and replaced on a regular basis.

When I heard about the concept of point to point I thought exactly the same thing. Nothing stopping people from speeding and then stopping just short of the second camera and waiting a while just to prove a point.

On the other hand, even the NRMA say point to point don’t have any effect on accident rates.

“Motoring body NRMA says the new cameras will do little to stop crashes on ACT roads. Spokesman Allan Evans says some countries are now removing speed cameras because they are not effective in stopping speeding.

“The best way to do it and all the research points to it, is to have a visible police presence – that’s the way you’ll get the attitude change,” he said.”

Personally I think placing these cameras on long straight stretches of well-paved roads is just revenue raising. Most accidents happen at intersections or on badly maintained roads. Put cameras were most accidents happen and then perhaps they might get more support from the community.

Bane said :

Thoroughly Smashed said :

If you need to spend more than a fraction of a second a few times a minute to monitor your speedometer, please go down to the ACT Government Shopfront and turn in your licence.

5 times a week, I have to travel home heading west into the setting sun. It takes up to a few seconds for my eyes to adjust when I look down, and another few when I look back up. I’ve done what I can to reduce the problem; I wear sunglasses, but my helmet doesn’t have a sun visor, funnily enough. If there was a point-to-point camera along that stretch, I would feel compelled to continually look down to ensure I wouldn’t get fined. And this is improving my safety?

Obviously the powers that be have decided that this is a cure-all solution and I doubt if any correspondence can be entered into.

Thoroughly Smashed said :

If you need to spend more than a fraction of a second a few times a minute to monitor your speedometer, please go down to the ACT Government Shopfront and turn in your licence.

5 times a week, I have to travel home heading west into the setting sun. It takes up to a few seconds for my eyes to adjust when I look down, and another few when I look back up. I’ve done what I can to reduce the problem; I wear sunglasses, but my helmet doesn’t have a sun visor, funnily enough. If there was a point-to-point camera along that stretch, I would feel compelled to continually look down to ensure I wouldn’t get fined. And this is improving my safety?

Gerry-Built said :

Crap. You quickly get a feel for the speed you are doing… If you are speeding, you know it.

Besides, the cars around you should be doing about the same speed anyhow.

“Feeling” what speed you are going is hardly accurate. I doubt anyone would get out of a fine by honestly claiming that they “felt” they were under the limit

And I don’t know what Canberra you live in, but unless it’s rush hour, it’s far from uncommon to find yourself alone on a stretch of road. And how do you know the other person is watching their speedo anyway?

So tooks, why do we need P2P cameras? Why do AFT want to wind back the rapid units (which I fully support)? Because automation means they don’t actually have to do anything. I note most petrol head lobbyists suggest a uniformed copper in a marked car is a very effective tool at improving behaviour. A fine in the mail at a later date removes the behaviour from the penalty.

The Traineediplomat6:37 pm 22 Sep 10

I, for one, welcome our new surveillance overlords.

+1

The Traineediplomat6:35 pm 22 Sep 10

LikeWhoa said :

I’m not trying to troll here.. just sayin. I always travel 20-30 above the speed limit, or at a speed which I consider safe and I have never had an accident. I have however had several speeding fines and they are bloody annoying – who are they to say what speed i should f’n travel!

They are the democratically elected government charged with the safety of the citizens of the ACT, backed by law enforcement and piles of scientific research on road and vehicular safety including an effort to change the mindset of drivers to slow down everywhere, not just in P2P or fixed speed camera zones for the increased safety of everyone!

Whereas you are just an idiot.

p1 said :

Solidarity said :

OK, plate detection for rego/stolen plates is good, however they want this crap to replace the mobile RAPID units?

what?

so now crims with actual stolen plates will just avoid hindmarsh drive, awesome.

Actually, the crim will drive past the camera, while speeding, then the next day the government will have a photo that proves that the plate was used on a white commodore (probably also stolen). Yay!

ah I get it now, it’ll fine people that have let thier rego lapse through laziness/forgetfulness!

these people have no excuse! these dangers to society!

revenue raising? nah. not at all.

bigred said :

Well the installation will free up plod to enforce road rules elsewhere. Oh yeah, I almost forgot. They don’t! And Stanhope couldn’t get them too! Forced the government to automate enforcement. Well super grimm wouldn’t have been let off if these were installed earlier.

No, the thousands of TINs issued to drivers every year hand themselves out.

Apologies for questioning the Stanhopian logic, but fixed and mobile speed cameras have been used in the ACT for the last 10 years. Stanhope says P2P cameras are being installed as Canberra continues to have a culture of speeding. In summary: speed cameras have been ineffective in changing the culture, so we’re introducing more speed cameras to change the culture.

Am I missing something here?

Oh, and +1 for what Noezis said.

Noezis said :

So the basics of it will be that as we drive on these sections of the road, we need to observe our speedos every 5 seconds to make sure we stick to the speed limit.

If you can’t manage your speed without taking your eyes off the road every 5 seconds, you either need to get off the road or to spring for cruise control.

Erg0 said :

LikeWhoa said :

I’m fine with these being used to ping stolen or unregistered cars, but srsly – more speed cameras? Can we not decide for ourselves what is a reasonable speed? Obviously the Government can’t get it right – has anybody actually ever driven 50km/h?? It’s crazy slow. And don’t get me started on school zones. We already have fixed cameras which have many a time almost caused an accident when I have had to slam on my brakes in order to slow down in time. Same goes for the white vans. Enough is enough..

To quote the internet: obvious troll is obvious.

I’m not trying to troll here.. just sayin. I always travel 20-30 above the speed limit, or at a speed which I consider safe and I have never had an accident. I have however had several speeding fines and they are bloody annoying – who are they to say what speed i should f’n travel!

johnboy said :

Or you could drive a little slower?

What difference does that make, seriously. It’s not about speed it’s about keeping your eyes on the road. The very first thing my driving instructor taught me, you’re eyes are the most important thing to have on the road at all times.

Most accidents happen 2 minutes from home as we get comfortable in the surrounds of where we are and not at high speed.

I’ve seen more crashes at T intersections at the entrance to suburbs than I have seen on any of the roads listed by the ACT government to have these point to point cameras.

I still have to look at my speedo even when driving slower, to make sure I’m not suddenly going over the limit.

So the basics of it will be that as we drive on these sections of the road, we need to observe our speedos every 5 seconds to make sure we stick to the speed limit.

Meaning that we take our eyes off the road every time, which in turn means that we miss the car in front of us braking, the kangaroo hopping across the road, the cyclist on our left side, the wombat making a break for it, the Chifley Stanhopless picketing and the broken down car in the left lane.

Awesome.

Or you could drive a little slower?

Mathman said :

It is questionable that a photo would be sufficient evidence to prosecute a driver of an unregistered car if it did not positively identify them.

No really, it is.
The photo is evidence that the car was being driven unregistered, that much is treated as a given.
AFP on receiving the photo and output of RAPID generate a notification of the fine ($550?) and serve it to the last registered person at the last known mailing address for the vehicle as previously registered.
Either the person served was the driver, or they weren’t.

If they weren’t, then they can stat-dec the blame onto somebody who was.
If they were the driver, their options beyond paying the fine are pretty limited.

Driving an unregistered registrable vehicle is illegal.
(Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Act 1999 Section 18: Prohibition on using unregistered registrable vehicles or vehicles with suspended registration. (1) A person must not use an unregistered registrable vehicle, or a vehicle with suspended registration, on a road or road related area. Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.)
A served person’s only legitimate option is either use one of the few exceptions allowed (Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2000 – driving it for purposes of agriculture, to a designated place under cover note, etc), or dispute any liability by pleading there is no degree of intention to commit the crime, mostly by claiming your ignorance as a defense to willfulness if your misunderstanding occurred in good-faith since the law was too complicated to easily comply with.

If your arguments differ from the grounds used by the AFP, it ends up in court, and the fine can be jacked up to $2200 for wasting everybody’s time if the court finds against you.

Basically, being served with the fine, and not having a valid rego certificate (with nobody else willing to accept blame) wrecks any real possibility of argument, since RAPID has provided evidence that the vehicle was being driven on a public road at a given time & place.

(Source: Had this same discussion not yesterday with someone here at work, who is about to pay the $2200 fine. They did afterall, drive a car on a public road without CTP and put everyone at risk, and doesn’t intend to do it again.)

The Chief Minister said:

Ultimately, the cameras will monitor stretches of roads, entry and exit points to roads, and check for unregistered, stolen or other vehicles of interest to police using number plate recognition technology.

And then what? It is questionable that a photo would be sufficient evidence to prosecute a driver of an unregistered car if it did not positively identify them. As for stolen and ‘other vehicles of interest’, cameras aren’t going to do a fat lot of good unless there is a copper stationed next to each of them.

LikeWhoa said :

I’m fine with these being used to ping stolen or unregistered cars, but srsly – more speed cameras? Can we not decide for ourselves what is a reasonable speed? Obviously the Government can’t get it right – has anybody actually ever driven 50km/h?? It’s crazy slow. And don’t get me started on school zones. We already have fixed cameras which have many a time almost caused an accident when I have had to slam on my brakes in order to slow down in time. Same goes for the white vans. Enough is enough..

To quote the internet: obvious troll is obvious.

Isn’t the section of Hindmarsh Drive mentioned the one with the big hill in it?

I can’t wait until everyone in Canberra goes down that hill riding the brakes the whole time…maybe the solution is to do 50km/h going up the hill and 110km/h on the way down?

I’m fine with these being used to ping stolen or unregistered cars, but srsly – more speed cameras? Can we not decide for ourselves what is a reasonable speed? Obviously the Government can’t get it right – has anybody actually ever driven 50km/h?? It’s crazy slow. And don’t get me started on school zones. We already have fixed cameras which have many a time almost caused an accident when I have had to slam on my brakes in order to slow down in time. Same goes for the white vans. Enough is enough..

I wonder if woolies or coles have considered installing plate recognising cameras at the entrance and exits to their supermarket carparks and petrol station. A cross reference to their “loyalty card” programs would let them know exactly how far people are willing to drive for each product, and how long they spend in the shop buying it.

Issue re surveillance has been around for a while, but govts don’t seem to care.

http://www.privacy.org.au/bba/2009/BBA09_IT_ANPR.rtf

and then

http://www.privacy.org.au/bba/index.html#open

Woody Mann-Caruso12:12 pm 22 Sep 10

Every time there’s a road safety topic there’s a chorus of Rioters who basically say: all forms of law enforcement are fine because I am safe and I never break the law.

Oh, bullsh*t. Come on, point to one person who’s said anything like that. I’ll wait.

What I’m saying is that if you do the crime, you do the time. If you want to pick and choose which laws you want to follow, then fine, but if you get caught – and with cheap and pervasive technology easier to deploy than ever, that’s increasingly likely – suck it up instead of crying like a little girl. That goes for me as much as anybody.

In the last couple of years I’ve had 2 family members involved in very bad accidents. And they were just that; accidents.

Setting aside that there’s no way for two properly maintained cars, driven in accordance with local conditions and in a manner complying with the law, to plow into one another – so what? “Sometimes people doing the right thing crash, and we’ll never be able to stop all crashes, so we should forget all about trying to catch people who do the wrong thing?”

Stick to skating, and leave driving to the adults.

Thoroughly Smashed11:57 am 22 Sep 10

Bane said :

Oh goodie, now I can spend even more time concentrating on the speedo to avoid a fine, instead of the road to avoid a crash

If you need to spend more than a fraction of a second a few times a minute to monitor your speedometer, please go down to the ACT Government Shopfront and turn in your licence.

Solidarity said :

OK, plate detection for rego/stolen plates is good, however they want this crap to replace the mobile RAPID units?

what?

so now crims with actual stolen plates will just avoid hindmarsh drive, awesome.

Actually, the crim will drive past the camera, while speeding, then the next day the government will have a photo that proves that the plate was used on a white commodore (probably also stolen). Yay!

vegrandis mens procul lascivio

I’m deeply concerned with the mass surveillance aspect. The sites indicated for placement of these p2p units show that safety is not the main concern. I’m also concerned about the laser talk. That 1w unit mentioned in #40 is seriously dangerous, not to mention that it is illegal to bring them into Oz without permits, and good luck with that.

OK, plate detection for rego/stolen plates is good, however they want this crap to replace the mobile RAPID units?

what?

so now crims with actual stolen plates will just avoid hindmarsh drive, awesome.

Every time there’s a road safety topic there’s a chorus of Rioters who basically say: all forms of law enforcement are fine because I am safe and I never break the law.

Honestly? Never? Always come to a complete stop at stop signs? NEVER let the speedo slip 5kmh over when going down a steep hill? Come on!!?

We all think we’re pretty good (and fairly safe) drivers. I do. I’ve never been in an accident and have had only 1 speeding fine in almost 20 years of driving. But this doesn’t qualify me to get on my high horse and blame all other drivers on the road, nor does it mean I want every aspect of poor driving to result in a fine.

In the last couple of years I’ve had 2 family members involved in very bad accidents. And they were just that; accidents. In both cases, none of the cars involved were speeding, conditions were fine and there was no alcohol or drugs involved. Sometimes cars hit each other with shocking results – and no amount of cameras or policing will completely prevent it from happening.

“I caught the end of a top gear episode where they were talking about the fixed speed cameras and apparently the trick is to be in a different lane when you go through the second one.”

Yeah, that number plate recognition technology will NEVER pick up on that!

hasn’t 3/4 of road deaths in A.C.T. in 2010 been due to ice freak drug addicts and not normal everyday tax paying people driving around.

Woody Mann-Caruso10:38 pm 21 Sep 10

@cranky: yes, yes, good, ha ha.

Bane said :

Oh goodie, now I can spend even more time concentrating on the speedo to avoid a fine, instead of the road to avoid a crash

Crap. You quickly get a feel for the speed you are doing… If you are speeding, you know it.

Besides, the cars around you should be doing about the same speed anyhow.

cranky said :

1. Is there ANY evidence that speed cameras reduce road accidents?

2. Are speed limits applied to various roads sensible?

3. The output from these cameras will be assessed by Pub Servs, not law authorities. Vested interests intrude. No leeway will be allowed.

4. The Big Brother aspect, where every vehicle movement on particular main roads will be recorded. This is a step too far – Where the hell are my civil rights to enjoy life without the ACT Government being privy to my movements?

1. There is plenty of evidence speed cameras punish people who break the law.

2. Probably not. Many researchers (people who, unlikely you or me, examine these issues professionally) believe Australian urban speed limits are far too high.

3. What vested interests? And aren’t public servants the same thing as “law authorities”?

4. I am disquieted by this, too. A genuinely good point (unlike the others).

cranky said :

1. Is there ANY evidence that speed cameras reduce road accidents?

Who cares? If it taxes people who are too stupid to watch that little dial thingy just beyond their steering wheel, I am all for it…

Looks like a basic error to me, most of this Parkes Way section is 90km/h.

Table 8.1: Potential P2P Sites
No. | Name of Road | From | To | Speed | Approximate Distance
10 |Parkes Way | Tuggeranong Parkway | Edinburgh Avenue | 80km/h | 3km

Applied speed limits probably aren’t particularly sensible. Ellenborough St used to be 80 from Kaleen to Nth Lyneham, now it’s 60. I can’t remember large numbers of accidents on that street so I doubt it was changed for that reason.

Cranky, you’ll soon learn to live with CCTV watching you on Canberra’s roads or civic centres. You’re already on camera when you shop. I lived in the most watched city in the World, London, for a decade and you don’t even notice the cameras. Anyway if you’ve done nothing wrong, you’ve got nothing to hide.

If it is to be used to catch unregistered or unroadworthy cars then the sooner it’s implemented the better.

how can they find unlicensed drivers;?

It will be food if they get some of the unregistered cars off the road, but I guess they are probably being driven by unlicenced drivers so there is nothing you can do to stop them doing it.

Does anybody know the insurance situation in the ACT if you get hit by an unregistered car? I know in NSW they charge everyone a little more to cover the unregistered cars so you are covered no matter what. Im not sure the same happens in th ACT.

Well the installation will free up plod to enforce road rules elsewhere. Oh yeah, I almost forgot. They don’t! And Stanhope couldn’t get them too! Forced the government to automate enforcement. Well super grimm wouldn’t have been let off if these were installed earlier.

1. Is there ANY evidence that speed cameras reduce road accidents?

2. Are speed limits applied to various roads sensible?

3. The output from these cameras will be assessed by Pub Servs, not law authorities. Vested interests intrude. No leeway will be allowed.

4. The Big Brother aspect, where every vehicle movement on particular main roads will be recorded. This is a step too far – Where the hell are my civil rights to enjoy life without the ACT Government being privy to my movements?

Sonic: I expect civic uproar to occur when ACT residents twig how much you have intruded on their lives.

shadow boxer said :

Make the speed limits reasonable and people will stop speeding, if people think the law is an ass they will treat it as such. A modern car is quite capable of doing 10-20 above the current limits perectly safely. Most reasonable people believe that and behave accordingly.

I caught the end of a top gear episode where they were talking about the fixed speed cameras and apparently the trick is to be in a different lane when you go through the second one.

A modern car is quite capable of travelling 10-20 above the speed limit although the modern arseclown behind the wheel who thinks that is the reason the limits haven’t changed.

shadow boxer said :

Yes, because the general public know best ….. ROFLMAO. The general public also has common sense thats not all that common.

Thats all good, those who believe they know better and decide to thumb their nose at the law, will continue to make voluntary contributions to the public purse.

Cool, carry on, your road safety strategy is producing outstanding results.

Like what? You must have some data to back that up ….. YOUR so called road safety strategy will produce possibly more collisions with more serious damage/injuries. Sounds like a winner to me.

What studies have you undertaken to show what speeds are ok to travel on certain roads?

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

I caught the end of a top gear episode

I know what that’s like. I remember this one time I sat down to watch, but then Dad asked me to move the Camira to get the Torana out so he could get to the Commodore, but I lost the keys to the Cortina and then I almost scratched the boat!

Thank God you didn’t dent the P76!

Sammy said :

now I can spend even more time concentrating on the speedo to avoid a fine, instead of the road

Most human brains are capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

Well, that’s kind of true…but when the brain multitasks, it’s not actually doing more than one thing at a time; it’s devoting tiny slices of time to each task and quickly alternating between them. Often, this has been shown to be to the detriment of all of the tasks involved. Humans are generally better off doing one task at a time wherever possible. Of course, driving will always require us to multi-task whether we like it or not, but why add another task which is, in my opinion, not justified?

I just don’t think there should be so much focus on speed and often little else, and I don’t think point-to-point cameras will make alot of difference apart from making some people poorer and providing another distraction on the road.

Current camera/radar systems don’t strictly enforce the speed limit (+10%? +5kmh? Who knows). I wonder if the leeway given under this system will be more/less/same?

It’s the mass surveillance capability that worries me. Couple it with a well designed data mining system and you could probably track every vehicle matched to a likely person on the those roads automatically. The policies for these systems have a habit of never staying as narrow as they start. Time to replace the foil liner in my hat.

nhand42 said :

Jungle Jim said :

KB – 99% of people on Riot ACT think that all those who don’t think like them or act like them are bogans.

Well the important thing is you’ve found a way to feel superior to both groups.

And how!

Good to see they don’t even know the speed limit on the roads they propose for a P2P setup.

The speed limit on Parkes Way between Tuggeranong Parkway and Edinburgh Ave is 90km/h not 80km/h as stated in the report (page 47). This is one of the sections of road proposed for Stage 1 (page 51).

Part of me likes the government raising money in ways unlikely to affect me and thus not raise rates and rego more.

I admit that often I will do 10kmh over the speed limit, because a lot of the roads are fine to do that. But i pay attention to everything and have not been caught by a mobile camera or a fixed camera. Majority of people will just stick to the limit between point to points.

Where they could make a killing is cameras to pick up people who can’t merge, particulalry on the parkway, where people think its safe to merge at 50 kmh when traffic is doing 90-100 kmh.

PBO said :

One has to wonder what the effect of +20mw laser pointer would have on these cameras.

20mw pfft! Why muck around with a toy when a portable 1 Watt laser is available for the cost of your average speeding ticket.

Sammy said :

now I can spend even more time concentrating on the speedo to avoid a fine, instead of the road

Most human brains are capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

Yep, up to 3 things at once.

shadow boxer3:55 pm 21 Sep 10

Yes, because the general public know best ….. ROFLMAO. The general public also has common sense thats not all that common.

Thats all good, those who believe they know better and decide to thumb their nose at the law, will continue to make voluntary contributions to the public purse.

Cool, carry on, your road safety strategy is producing outstanding results.

colourful sydney racing identity3:42 pm 21 Sep 10

Bane said :

Oh goodie, now I can spend even more time concentrating on the speedo to avoid a fine, instead of the road to avoid a crash

So you can *now* obey the law? Gosh!

now I can spend even more time concentrating on the speedo to avoid a fine, instead of the road

Most human brains are capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

shadow boxer said :

arescarti42 said :

shadow boxer said :

At the end of the day people will travel at what they consider a fair and reasonable speed for the conditions, unfortunately speed limits are going down and making no allowance for improvements in car braking, visibility, handling and safety features over the past 40 years. This is mainly because those consultants in the car safety industry need to justify their existence and don’t want to tackle the big issues (divided roads, better training, increasing the driving age).

Well, at the end of the day, the rational people will people will probably decide that getting to work 2 or 3 minutes quicker is not worth the risk of a several hundred dollar fine.

Sure, recent cars may have lots of safety features, but not everyone drives new cars, and human reflexes certainly haven’t improved over the last 40 years.

The fact of the matter is the slower you are going, the more time you have to react to potential problems and the less severe any collision is going to be.

2 or 3 minutes quicker than what ? your argument is flawed as the vast majority of the motoring public believe your start speed is unreasonable. Presumably that’s why they speed.

Yes, because the general public know best ….. ROFLMAO. The general public also has common sense thats not all that common.

Thats all good, those who believe they know better and decide to thumb their nose at the law, will continue to make voluntary contributions to the public purse.

Jungle Jim said :

KB – 99% of people on Riot ACT think that all those who don’t think like them or act like them are bogans.

Well the important thing is you’ve found a way to feel superior to both groups.

KB1971 said :

What, so 99% of the driving poulations are bogans??

I’m not sure where you’re driving that you think 99% of the drivers are slamming on the brakes before the cameras.

A small minority of drivers on the road behave badly but they’re ruining it for the rest of us.

Oh goodie, now I can spend even more time concentrating on the speedo to avoid a fine, instead of the road to avoid a crash

shadow boxer2:31 pm 21 Sep 10

farnarkler said :

Shadow boxer you’ve said “At the end of the day people will travel at what they consider a fair and reasonable speed”

No worries but if that speed is over the limit, they’ll pay for it.

As for improvements in car braking, handling and safety features, I like driving my older car………………at the posted speed limit.

Good for you, no-one said you couldn’t, I’m not sure why you think the rest of us should have to put up with it though.

I would far prefer a proper speed limit that the community can get behind and believe in.

Speeders would then be ostracised in the same way drink drivers are these days.

At the moment people think getting a speeding fine is just bad luck like getting a puncture and this lack of respect for the law flows through to our young drivers.

Oh and TAMS please, please, please set up a point to point camera on Ellenbrough St in Kaleen. You’ll make $millions.

Shadow boxer you’ve said “At the end of the day people will travel at what they consider a fair and reasonable speed”

No worries but if that speed is over the limit, they’ll pay for it.

As for improvements in car braking, handling and safety features, I like driving my older car………………at the posted speed limit.

Russ said :

Ever been past the Safe-T-Cam on the Hume up to Sydney? Every time you have there’s a record kept. How long has this been going on? They used evidence from it to nab the murderers of a Saudi diplomat in Canberra in 1998.

Murder? In Canberra? I don’t think so..
The accused were acquitted of both murder and manslaughter.

shadow boxer1:47 pm 21 Sep 10

arescarti42 said :

shadow boxer said :

At the end of the day people will travel at what they consider a fair and reasonable speed for the conditions, unfortunately speed limits are going down and making no allowance for improvements in car braking, visibility, handling and safety features over the past 40 years. This is mainly because those consultants in the car safety industry need to justify their existence and don’t want to tackle the big issues (divided roads, better training, increasing the driving age).

Well, at the end of the day, the rational people will people will probably decide that getting to work 2 or 3 minutes quicker is not worth the risk of a several hundred dollar fine.

Sure, recent cars may have lots of safety features, but not everyone drives new cars, and human reflexes certainly haven’t improved over the last 40 years.

The fact of the matter is the slower you are going, the more time you have to react to potential problems and the less severe any collision is going to be.

2 or 3 minutes quicker than what ? your argument is flawed as the vast majority of the motoring public believe your start speed is unreasonable. Presumably that’s why they speed.

Jungle Jim said :

KB – 99% of people on Riot ACT think that all those who don’t think like them or act like them are bogans.

Don’t be so limiting. Most of the people who think the same as me are also bogans.

I see two things happening.
1) people will drive at high speed through the first camera, and stop just before the second until the time limit runs out, then drive past – just because they can.

2) The cameras are going to need to be repaired and replaced on a regular basis.

Woody Mann-Caruso1:37 pm 21 Sep 10

As Benjamin Franklin said, “Those willing to sacrifice liberty in the name of security, deserve neither security or liberty”.

No, he didn’t. Try “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” See the ‘essential’ bit? See the ‘little temporary’ bit? Have you ever actually read anything written by Franklin, or did you just see this misquoted on your desk calendar and think ‘yay, some smart dead white guy said I can do whatever I want!’

fozzy said :

One of the biggest problems with systems such as this the feature creep.

Ever been past the Safe-T-Cam on the Hume up to Sydney? Every time you have there’s a record kept. How long has this been going on? They used evidence from it to nab the murderers of a Saudi diplomat in Canberra in 1998.

I’ve got no beef with the traffic and criminal aspects of the system, but the “mass survelliance” aspect definitely rubs me the wrong way. The idea of a permanent searchable record of everywhere I’ve driven just creeps me the fuck out.

Jungle Jim said :

KB – 99% of people on Riot ACT think that all those who don’t think like them or act like them are bogans.

I guess I should know that…….what was I thinking!!!!

The two locations noted by Stanhopeless means they will be putting up at least 3 new camera for this. I will be interested to see the government prove the accuracy of the Hindmarsh drive one, up a steep hill, down a steep hill and at least 4 sets of traffic lights. Gungahlin drive will be a bit easier being an almost flat bit of road, but with poor road condition for much of it.

I wish him luck given that Victoria has found that they need to place them on flat smooth roads to ensure they are accurate.

shadow boxer said :

At the end of the day people will travel at what they consider a fair and reasonable speed for the conditions, unfortunately speed limits are going down and making no allowance for improvements in car braking, visibility, handling and safety features over the past 40 years. This is mainly because those consultants in the car safety industry need to justify their existence and don’t want to tackle the big issues (divided roads, better training, increasing the driving age).

Well, at the end of the day, the rational people will people will probably decide that getting to work 2 or 3 minutes quicker is not worth the risk of a several hundred dollar fine.

Sure, recent cars may have lots of safety features, but not everyone drives new cars, and human reflexes certainly haven’t improved over the last 40 years.

The fact of the matter is the slower you are going, the more time you have to react to potential problems and the less severe any collision is going to be.

KB – 99% of people on Riot ACT think that all those who don’t think like them or act like them are bogans.

nhand42 said :

Not happy about the mass surveillance, but very happy about the point-to-point speeding detection. I’m sick to death of bogans who think they’re being clever when they speed between cameras and slam the brakes on just before passing through them. Any authoritarian abuses brought about by these cameras are squarely on their mullet bearing heads.

Bogans, ruining society since forever.

What, so 99% of the driving poulations are bogans??

colourful sydney racing identity12:03 pm 21 Sep 10

Solidarity said :

I wonder how many people will not realise they have been over the limit until just before the second camera

How on earth would that happen?

If the software used in this system is bamboozled by someone changing lanes or the imaging system melts down when subjected to a piffling laser then I’d suggest we should all be outraged that our money would be spent on such a ridiculously shonky system.

As Benjamin Franklin said, “Those willing to sacrifice liberty in the name of security, deserve neither security or liberty”.

I’m not so concerned with the further checking of speed limits, even though as many here have noted, it’s about revenue raising not safety. However, mass surveillance is a great concern.

One of the biggest problems with systems such as this the feature creep.

shadow boxer11:49 am 21 Sep 10

colourful sydney racing identity said :

shadow boxer said :

Make the speed limits reasonable and people will stop speeding.
.

Brilliant. Legalising the killing of anyone who ticks you off will drastically reduce the murder rates.

“rolls eyes” even more brilliant, ban cars and no-one will get killed.

At the end of the day people will travel at what they consider a fair and reasonable speed for the conditions, unfortunately speed limits are going down and making no allowance for improvements in car braking, visibility, handling and safety features over the past 40 years. This is mainly because those consultants in the car safety industry need to justify their existence and don’t want to tackle the big issues (divided roads, better training, increasing the driving age).

Just out of interest what was the speed limt 40 years ago ?

Amanda Hugankis11:45 am 21 Sep 10

Time to dust my Delorian off …

I wonder how many people will not realise they have been over the limit until just before the second camera, then pull up to a crawl just before the second one, impeding traffic flow.

Hmmm.

They trialed this in the UK with Gatso’s, trial ended due to them being vandalised too much. One can only hope…

shadow boxer11:29 am 21 Sep 10

I only caught the end of it so happy to be corrected but yes the lane change(s) threw out the maths.

I think a lot of the fixed cameras also only point at one particular lane

Woody Mann-Caruso11:24 am 21 Sep 10

I caught the end of a top gear episode

I know what that’s like. I remember this one time I sat down to watch, but then Dad asked me to move the Camira to get the Torana out so he could get to the Commodore, but I lost the keys to the Cortina and then I almost scratched the boat!

colourful sydney racing identity11:21 am 21 Sep 10

shadow boxer said :

Make the speed limits reasonable and people will stop speeding.
.

Brilliant. Legalising the killing of anyone who ticks you off will drastically reduce the murder rates.

shadow boxer said :

I caught the end of a top gear episode where they were talking about the fixed speed cameras and apparently the trick is to be in a different lane when you go through the second one.

Is this because changing lanes also causes a shift in time? The explains why some people change lanes so often.

The mass surveillance part interests me also. Will be interested to know the finer details about what is recorded, how long they retain it for and who will be able to access it.

Also of interest might be the form the data is kept in. For example, will the data be automatically matched with rego records, so they can get an idea of how many people from which town centre go where? Or whether a larger proportion of young people work a larger distance from home? Will police be able to use that data to identify people with “suspicious” patterns of behaviour (as opposed to checking the behaviour of someone already suspected of something)?

ConanOfCooma11:04 am 21 Sep 10

They have a set on the Monaro Hwy now as well, between Bredbo and Cooma.

At the moment they are non-functional, and the RTA pinky-promises that they will only be used to ping trucks.

Come 2011…

From the report:

Potentially, the ANPR cameras used in a P2P system could, in the future, be used to support road tolling, road user charging, and congestion charging schemes.

Let me translate that:

Inevitably, the ANPR cameras used in a P2P system will, when the budget next needs a boost, be used to support road tolling, road user charging, and congestion charging schemes.

shadow boxer10:31 am 21 Sep 10

Make the speed limits reasonable and people will stop speeding, if people think the law is an ass they will treat it as such. A modern car is quite capable of doing 10-20 above the current limits perectly safely. Most reasonable people believe that and behave accordingly.

I caught the end of a top gear episode where they were talking about the fixed speed cameras and apparently the trick is to be in a different lane when you go through the second one.

I find the nominated potential sites interesting. They’re all 80,90 and 100km/h zones that where the speed limit is regularly exceeded by many. Instead of looking into WHY the limit is being exceeded on a regular basis, the gubbinment is choosing to may people pay money for the privelidge of doing so. Is this what traffic enforcement has become?

There are many, many residential streets where idiots regularly exceed 50km/h by vast amounts… but not enough idiots for the cameras to be profitable, it would seem.

Interesting in particular is the choice of the eastern end of Hindmarsh drive. From Yamba drive to Monaro highway… 3 interesections are actively controlled by traffic lights, 2 are passively controlled. There are 2-3 lanes in each direction. There is a median strip seperating traffic. No bus stops. The speed limit is 80km/h… this is where the plan is to put cameras.

Interestingly enough… the above scenario is very similar to the 90km/h William Hovell Drive… why isn’t this section of Hindmarsh also eligable for a higher speed limit?

I’ve digressed.

The western end of Hindmarsh drive between Streeton Dr and Darwinia Tce has one lane in each direction, no median strip (no refuge for pedestrians), 4 passively controlled intersections, no traffic lights, bus stops, passes within closer to proximity to houses… speed limit is still 80km/h.

Same situation applies on Coulter drive between William Hovell and Belconnen Way… 80km/h speed limit, 3 passive intersections, no refuge, bus stops…

Surely it would be far more dangerous to exceed 80km/h on the two latter sections of road. Yet we’re going to be permanently enforcing the road where it could be argued that a higher speed limit is well warranted?

Why is this?

Question Everything.

One has to wonder what the effect of +20mw laser pointer would have on these cameras.

Not happy about the mass surveillance, but very happy about the point-to-point speeding detection. I’m sick to death of bogans who think they’re being clever when they speed between cameras and slam the brakes on just before passing through them. Any authoritarian abuses brought about by these cameras are squarely on their mullet bearing heads.

Bogans, ruining society since forever.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.