14 August 2015

Should we digitally name and shame Canberra's bad drivers?

| Marcus Paul
Join the conversation
55
car-stock031214

I love social media sites, especially those community notice boards. Occasionally they throw up little gems like these:

“And the employee of the week goes to…. the wing nut from xxx Company driving a white Territory xxx number plate through Murrumbateman this morning. Your skill in driving that motorcyclist off the road at the end of the overtaking lane before McIntosh was carried out in a true ‘I don’t give a sh*t’ style. You upped the ante by speeding through the road works and then you forced another vehicle on to the shoulder at the end of the Capricorn overtaking merge. Outstanding examples of truly crap driving – you represent your employer well!

And this :

Must be the morning for morons! I reported the toyota with the numberplate “XXX'” to the police this morning as they got cranky that no-one would let them speed through the roadworks and then came from 2 cars behind to run me off the road at the Capricorn over taking lane , I hope mine and yours meet each other one morning in a head on and then that will be 2 less w*nkers to deal with !

Wow.

I’ve deleted out number plate details, and hidden the companies name for this exercise. However the question needs to be asked: Is it ever okay to name and shame on social media? Sure, a good vent with like minded people might make you feel better, and perhaps even solicit responses such as that highlighted above.

However, is it dangerous? After all what happens if someone loses a job over this and then decides to go online and finds the person who posted the evidence? Some people even post dash cam videos or snap pictures on mobile phones and post.

Sure, from time to time I’ve named and shamed car owners who have blatantly illegally parked in disabled spots, but usually only after a bit of thought. I am usually left though with the feeling I have possibly breached someone’s privacy in some way. My one rule here though is if it’s a diplomatic vehicle I’m right onto it. Last year, I named the same US Embassy DC plated car stopping in a disabled spot day after day. Eventually, we received an apology and a promise the law would not be broken again.

There will be some people who might say they deserved it because they’re doing the wrong thing, endangering lives, or making disabled parking difficult. Some might even say it’s none of my business, it’s police who deal with this.

Really, try calling Gungahlin or Tuggeranong police with a complaint that someone nearly ran you off the road and due to lack of evidence or the fact no-one was actually hurt, it ends up it being a low priority if at all.

So, over to you RiotACT folk. Name and shame – or simply let it be?

Should bad drivers be named and shamed?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Marcus Paul is the host of Canberra Live 3pm weekdays on 2CC.

Join the conversation

55
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

tim_c said :

MonarchRepublic said :

Spot on
http://www.police.act.gov.au/roads-and-traffic/collisions.aspx

“People unfortunate enough to be involved in a collision in the ACT must by law report the incident to the police within 24 hours. A form available on the Canberra Connect website completely removes the need to attend an ACT Police Station …”

And you’ll find that the Police will never even see that report if you tick the “No” box next to the question: “Did anyone require treatment at the scene?” If it happens again, I’ll be at least putting on a Band-Aid at the scene.

I thought they had recently changed the rules that a minor collision didn’t require reporting because TAMS couldn’t be bothered filing all the unread reports, or was that just a suggested change?

According to what I’ve been told elsewhere, and the insurance company, when I asked do I have to inform the police, the answer was no, it’s not necessary.

MonarchRepublic said :

Spot on
http://www.police.act.gov.au/roads-and-traffic/collisions.aspx

“People unfortunate enough to be involved in a collision in the ACT must by law report the incident to the police within 24 hours. A form available on the Canberra Connect website completely removes the need to attend an ACT Police Station …”

And you’ll find that the Police will never even see that report if you tick the “No” box next to the question: “Did anyone require treatment at the scene?” If it happens again, I’ll be at least putting on a Band-Aid at the scene.

I thought they had recently changed the rules that a minor collision didn’t require reporting because TAMS couldn’t be bothered filing all the unread reports, or was that just a suggested change?

MonarchRepublic3:38 pm 11 Aug 15

Holden Caulfield said :

Maya123 said :

…Accidents without a person being injured (and no-one was) are not reported to the police…

lolwut

Police may not need to attend an accident scene where no injury occurred, but a report still has to be filed with the Police and an incident number generated for future reference.

At least, that’s what *should* happen.

Spot on
http://www.police.act.gov.au/roads-and-traffic/collisions.aspx

“People unfortunate enough to be involved in a collision in the ACT must by law report the incident to the police within 24 hours. A form available on the Canberra Connect website completely removes the need to attend an ACT Police Station …”

Holden Caulfield2:32 pm 11 Aug 15

Maya123 said :

…Accidents without a person being injured (and no-one was) are not reported to the police…

lolwut

Police may not need to attend an accident scene where no injury occurred, but a report still has to be filed with the Police and an incident number generated for future reference.

At least, that’s what *should* happen.

There is a group on Facebook, it’s “Canberra Drivers”. It mostly consists of concerned drivers posting photos of other drivers who have cut them off, tailgated them, parked inconsiderately, thrown a cigarette out of the window, or are sitting in the right hand land on the GDE and parkway etc. The result? They get slammed, not supported. It’s not for the faint hearted.

JimCharles said :

This is the problem in Canberra, the driving philosophy and mentality is so backwards that good ideas get ridiculed. Stupid is as stupid does.
The reason speed limits are so much slower is because they need to match the overall skill limit of the drivers, but rather than spending money on education that will teach that driving too slowly and selfishly can also be classed as aggressive and disruptive, and many drivers being unable to anticipate, understand or judge speed, traffic flow, risk and in some cases, seem to think they’re on another planet….actually makes one of the best physical driving environments on the planet into something not unlike driving in a backwater redneck town in Texas where they don’t bother with licenses. It’s dangerous stuff.

If they’re serious about safety in Canberra they should do more spot checks on vehicles with bald tyres, bad brakes, and busted head, tail and brake lights, and start educating lane hoggers who don’t check mirrors or blind spots and slow down the entire traffic flow, instead of just constantly cutting speeds and putting in cameras to raise revenue because they know the locals are not up to 1st world driving standards so everybody’s experience has to be reduced to base level.
It’s basically admitting failure having to slow everything to a crawl because there are so many drivers who have never been taught to drive to a reputable standard…and they don’t know they’re doing it.
The idea is to make journeys quicker and safer so traffic flow is made more efficient, not this rubbish they practice round here.

Perhaps rather than re-testing, they need to actually test properly in the first place – it would help if they didn’t hand out licences like raffle tickets at the spring fair. But this is exactly what people said would happen when the ACT Government proposed driving schools being able to test their own students. Anyone could tell that a strict driving school would get a reputation (probably even unfairly tainted with the complaint “they just want me to pay them for more lessons”) and lose business because of it – students are going to go to the driving schools that make it easy to pass – we are certainly seeing the results in our traffic behaviour.

Evilomlap said :

tim_c said :

If road users could see the Police taking an active role in enforcing traffic rules, the public wouldn’t feel such a need to take matters into their own hands

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

I don’t believe anyone is blaming the police for their lack of presence on our roads and certainly I’m not. I know the real fault for lack of police resources lies with this government, and the end result is something close to anarchy on our roads.

Given that situation I don’t see a choice but to name and shame in the hope that highlighting bad, anti-social or dangerous driving will improve driving for the majority who mostly do the right thing.

Tooks said :

tim_c said :

If road users could see the Police taking an active role in enforcing traffic rules, the public wouldn’t feel such a need to take matters into their own hands

So just if a road user doesn’t see the police enforcing the law, then they should take matters into their own hands? That is ridiculous.

I agree – it is not for the public to take matters into their own hands, but this is the inevitable tendency when people feel justice is not being implemented by those who are supposed to carry it out – history shows this repeatedly.

Re-read my original comment above – I don’t condone vigilante action, but I understand why some feel it may be needed. Public shaming is happening whether we agree with it or not – perhaps our authorities need to do a bit of head scratching and think about why it is becoming more prevalent.

Antagonist said :

Maya123 said :

Yes, my car was written off about a fortnight ago, by a tail-ender, and the person following was not following that closely. Just shows how much distance is needed to stop suddenly. ** It was the driver in front of me who stopped suddenly that caused all this.** I only just managed to miss them, by steering sharply left. Unfortunately the car behind me didn’t miss my car.

– My emphasis added.

Are you really sure it was the driver in front of you that caused all of this? If you only just managed to miss the car in front of you “by steering sharply left”, then you were also travelling too close to the car in front of you. You did not leave yourself enough space to brake safely. I put it to you that you are equally to blame.

Let’s clarify tailgating. In dry weather and on a good surface you need three seconds gap. Watch the rear of the car in front pass a landmark like a light post or a sign, and then count ‘one thousand and one, one thousand and two, one thousand and three’. That’s three seconds. If you are less than three seconds behind then you will have difficulty in missing the car in front if they pull up for any reason. In the case of this multiple vehicle crash the driver in front did pull up suddenly, but any car which runs into another car from behind is automatically at fault. Tailgating is a done deal. You don’t have to admit to anything; you’re automatically at fault.

The driver in front ‘did not cause all of this’ because that driver is fully entitled to stop for crossing pedestrians, wildlife on the road or other road hazards such as broken bitumen or whatever. For these reasons we must not tailgate, and we must all maintain a three second gap as best we can.

On Canberra’s arterial roads, three seconds at 80 km/h is a substantial distance indeed.

Alexandra Craig said :

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

This is the problem in Canberra, the driving philosophy and mentality is so backwards that good ideas get ridiculed. Stupid is as stupid does.
The reason speed limits are so much slower is because they need to match the overall skill limit of the drivers, but rather than spending money on education that will teach that driving too slowly and selfishly can also be classed as aggressive and disruptive, and many drivers being unable to anticipate, understand or judge speed, traffic flow, risk and in some cases, seem to think they’re on another planet….actually makes one of the best physical driving environments on the planet into something not unlike driving in a backwater redneck town in Texas where they don’t bother with licenses. It’s dangerous stuff.

If they’re serious about safety in Canberra they should do more spot checks on vehicles with bald tyres, bad brakes, and busted head, tail and brake lights, and start educating lane hoggers who don’t check mirrors or blind spots and slow down the entire traffic flow, instead of just constantly cutting speeds and putting in cameras to raise revenue because they know the locals are not up to 1st world driving standards so everybody’s experience has to be reduced to base level.
It’s basically admitting failure having to slow everything to a crawl because there are so many drivers who have never been taught to drive to a reputable standard…and they don’t know they’re doing it.
The idea is to make journeys quicker and safer so traffic flow is made more efficient, not this rubbish they practice round here.

vintage123 said :

Maya123 said :

Antagonist said :

Maya123 said :

Yes, my car was written off about a fortnight ago, by a tail-ender, and the person following was not following that closely. Just shows how much distance is needed to stop suddenly. ** It was the driver in front of me who stopped suddenly that caused all this.** I only just managed to miss them, by steering sharply left. Unfortunately the car behind me didn’t miss my car.

– My emphasis added.

Are you really sure it was the driver in front of you that caused all of this? If you only just managed to miss the car in front of you “by steering sharply left”, then you were also travelling too close to the car in front of you. You did not leave yourself enough space to brake safely. I put it to you that you are equally to blame.

But I didn’t hit anyone. The car in front of me was undamaged. Yes, I might have been a bit close. If I had to steer to the left I likely was. Which, as I said, just goes to show how much distance is needed between cars, because I was not travelling any closer than most other cars; in fact further back than many; probably including the car behind me, which I did not consider was tailgating me.
What happened was that the car in front on Horse Park Drive, suddenly stopped without pre-indication to turn right from NOT the right hand lane. I took evasive action and missed them completely, but the car behind didn’t miss me, even though I was now partly beside the car in front. At least the car behind was fully insured, and the driver seemed like a nice person and took full responsibility.

Golly gosh. The guy in front got off scot free without any damage after slamming on the brakes in the middle of the road, you got a new car as yours was written off, and the poor guy behind, whom you quoted as ” not tailgating or travelling even that close” was Shafted with a negligent driving causing accident charge, a fine, demerit points and liable for the insurance expense. Gee whiz, you bet he looked like a nice person by taking full responsibility – he was either incredibly stupid or about to do a runner to Malta to avoid any consequence.

I was just yanking Maya123’s chain, but it is a good argument for having a camera fitted. It also costs less than a years insurance or 6 months rego too. Looking at getting me one of those little Vicovation jobbies … if the Aussie dollar ever improves against UK currency.

vintage123 said :

Maya123 said :

Antagonist said :

Maya123 said :

Yes, my car was written off about a fortnight ago, by a tail-ender, and the person following was not following that closely. Just shows how much distance is needed to stop suddenly. ** It was the driver in front of me who stopped suddenly that caused all this.** I only just managed to miss them, by steering sharply left. Unfortunately the car behind me didn’t miss my car.

– My emphasis added.

Are you really sure it was the driver in front of you that caused all of this? If you only just managed to miss the car in front of you “by steering sharply left”, then you were also travelling too close to the car in front of you. You did not leave yourself enough space to brake safely. I put it to you that you are equally to blame.

But I didn’t hit anyone. The car in front of me was undamaged. Yes, I might have been a bit close. If I had to steer to the left I likely was. Which, as I said, just goes to show how much distance is needed between cars, because I was not travelling any closer than most other cars; in fact further back than many; probably including the car behind me, which I did not consider was tailgating me.
What happened was that the car in front on Horse Park Drive, suddenly stopped without pre-indication to turn right from NOT the right hand lane. I took evasive action and missed them completely, but the car behind didn’t miss me, even though I was now partly beside the car in front. At least the car behind was fully insured, and the driver seemed like a nice person and took full responsibility.

Golly gosh. The guy in front got off scot free without any damage after slamming on the brakes in the middle of the road, you got a new car as yours was written off, and the poor guy behind, whom you quoted as ” not tailgating or travelling even that close” was Shafted with a negligent driving causing accident charge, a fine, demerit points and liable for the insurance expense. Gee whiz, you bet he looked like a nice person by taking full responsibility – he was either incredibly stupid or about to do a runner to Malta to avoid any consequence.

“with a negligent driving causing accident charge, a fine, demerit points and liable for the insurance expense.”

Accidents without a person being injured (and no-one was) are not reported to the police, so the driver behind me didn’t get a fine or demerit points, but they likely lost some of their no claim bonus and had to pay excess. I didn’t lose my no claim bonus or have excess to pay and got more for my car by it being written off than likely I would have been able to sell it for, because of its age (15). However, it was running very well, with low kms, and I had hoped to have been able to drive it for a few more years. (My previous car was still running very well and looked great at 21.) I have now bought a new car, which means this accident did end up costing me money.

My problem with naming and shaming drivers is that we only see a photo – a snapshot of time – and rely on the submitter’s word that the person being photographed did the wrong thing. In my experience, there are an awful lot of drivers around the ACT that *think* they know the road rules, but in reality they don’t. The “give way to the right” misnomer is a perfect example. I wouldn’t be comfortable taking submissions from these people and placing blame publicly, based on their understanding of the road rules.

Maya123 said :

Antagonist said :

Maya123 said :

Yes, my car was written off about a fortnight ago, by a tail-ender, and the person following was not following that closely. Just shows how much distance is needed to stop suddenly. ** It was the driver in front of me who stopped suddenly that caused all this.** I only just managed to miss them, by steering sharply left. Unfortunately the car behind me didn’t miss my car.

– My emphasis added.

Are you really sure it was the driver in front of you that caused all of this? If you only just managed to miss the car in front of you “by steering sharply left”, then you were also travelling too close to the car in front of you. You did not leave yourself enough space to brake safely. I put it to you that you are equally to blame.

But I didn’t hit anyone. The car in front of me was undamaged. Yes, I might have been a bit close. If I had to steer to the left I likely was. Which, as I said, just goes to show how much distance is needed between cars, because I was not travelling any closer than most other cars; in fact further back than many; probably including the car behind me, which I did not consider was tailgating me.
What happened was that the car in front on Horse Park Drive, suddenly stopped without pre-indication to turn right from NOT the right hand lane. I took evasive action and missed them completely, but the car behind didn’t miss me, even though I was now partly beside the car in front. At least the car behind was fully insured, and the driver seemed like a nice person and took full responsibility.

Golly gosh. The guy in front got off scot free without any damage after slamming on the brakes in the middle of the road, you got a new car as yours was written off, and the poor guy behind, whom you quoted as ” not tailgating or travelling even that close” was Shafted with a negligent driving causing accident charge, a fine, demerit points and liable for the insurance expense. Gee whiz, you bet he looked like a nice person by taking full responsibility – he was either incredibly stupid or about to do a runner to Malta to avoid any consequence.

vintage123 said :

The days of police driving around and pinging people for other things is long gone. If police are driving, it means they are going from the station to call, like a theft or domestic or something. They don’t just drive around looking anymore. They just turn a blind eye, unless it’s an accident, and no other police are there.

To be honest, they really could outsource speeding functions.

Incorrect!
I was driving North on Adelaide Ave and a police van followed me off the main road and into Barton before flashing his lights and getting me to pull over. Asked why I was speeding and after checking my licence etc said I ‘may’ get a ticket in the mail (I never did). So even though they may be on their way from point A to point B, they will still intervene if need be.

I’ve also seen a number of times where someone has been pulled over by a police car just after the big roundabout at Woden, presumably for using the taxi/bus shortcut when heading North.

Antagonist said :

Maya123 said :

Yes, my car was written off about a fortnight ago, by a tail-ender, and the person following was not following that closely. Just shows how much distance is needed to stop suddenly. ** It was the driver in front of me who stopped suddenly that caused all this.** I only just managed to miss them, by steering sharply left. Unfortunately the car behind me didn’t miss my car.

– My emphasis added.

Are you really sure it was the driver in front of you that caused all of this? If you only just managed to miss the car in front of you “by steering sharply left”, then you were also travelling too close to the car in front of you. You did not leave yourself enough space to brake safely. I put it to you that you are equally to blame.

But I didn’t hit anyone. The car in front of me was undamaged. Yes, I might have been a bit close. If I had to steer to the left I likely was. Which, as I said, just goes to show how much distance is needed between cars, because I was not travelling any closer than most other cars; in fact further back than many; probably including the car behind me, which I did not consider was tailgating me.
What happened was that the car in front on Horse Park Drive, suddenly stopped without pre-indication to turn right from NOT the right hand lane. I took evasive action and missed them completely, but the car behind didn’t miss me, even though I was now partly beside the car in front. At least the car behind was fully insured, and the driver seemed like a nice person and took full responsibility.

Maya123 said :

Yes, my car was written off about a fortnight ago, by a tail-ender, and the person following was not following that closely. Just shows how much distance is needed to stop suddenly. ** It was the driver in front of me who stopped suddenly that caused all this.** I only just managed to miss them, by steering sharply left. Unfortunately the car behind me didn’t miss my car.

– My emphasis added.

Are you really sure it was the driver in front of you that caused all of this? If you only just managed to miss the car in front of you “by steering sharply left”, then you were also travelling too close to the car in front of you. You did not leave yourself enough space to brake safely. I put it to you that you are equally to blame.

tim_c said :

If road users could see the Police taking an active role in enforcing traffic rules, the public wouldn’t feel such a need to take matters into their own hands

So just if a road user doesn’t see the police enforcing the law, then they should take matters into their own hands? That is ridiculous.

cbrmale said :

tim_c said :

Evilomlap said :

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

Take issue all you like – it doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. When was the last time you saw a Police car pull someone over for a traffic offence? When was the last time you saw a traffic offence that they probably should have at least been cautioned on? Why have rules if they’re not going to be enforced?

I’m not blaming the Police for not doing their job – they are doing what they’re given budget to do (what’s left after funding the legacy projects of various Canberra City councillors) and what they’re instructed to do by a government that thinks it can solve all the traffic chaos with a few speed cameras, speed bumps and ever reducing speed limits, 60km/h, then 50, then 40, now 30km/h. Any one who drives with their eyes open will tell you it’s not working. The statistics tell us it’s not working.

If only road “accidents” were treated with the same seriousness as accidents with other workplace equipment or even firearms, we might see the number of deaths and injuries on our roads reducing.

You’re absolutely right, and the number one issue to be dealt with is tailgating. When I managed a fleet I had to take cars for assessment at AAMI and there were maybe 300 cars there, and about 49% of those cars had the front smashed in and about 49% had the rear smashed in.

The only time I ever see police enforcing road rules is when they have the speed guns out. All other roads rules: tailgating, failing to give way, failing to use indicators, driving unroadworthy cars; are basically unenforced. While the police are chronically under-resourced, I think that most Canberra drivers would like to see more emphasis on driving problems other than speeding. Especially tailgating, because the material and personal costs of front to rear crashes is substantial.

cbrmale said :

tim_c said :

Evilomlap said :

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

Take issue all you like – it doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. When was the last time you saw a Police car pull someone over for a traffic offence? When was the last time you saw a traffic offence that they probably should have at least been cautioned on? Why have rules if they’re not going to be enforced?

I’m not blaming the Police for not doing their job – they are doing what they’re given budget to do (what’s left after funding the legacy projects of various Canberra City councillors) and what they’re instructed to do by a government that thinks it can solve all the traffic chaos with a few speed cameras, speed bumps and ever reducing speed limits, 60km/h, then 50, then 40, now 30km/h. Any one who drives with their eyes open will tell you it’s not working. The statistics tell us it’s not working.

If only road “accidents” were treated with the same seriousness as accidents with other workplace equipment or even firearms, we might see the number of deaths and injuries on our roads reducing.

You’re absolutely right, and the number one issue to be dealt with is tailgating. When I managed a fleet I had to take cars for assessment at AAMI and there were maybe 300 cars there, and about 49% of those cars had the front smashed in and about 49% had the rear smashed in.

The only time I ever see police enforcing road rules is when they have the speed guns out. All other roads rules: tailgating, failing to give way, failing to use indicators, driving unroadworthy cars; are basically unenforced. While the police are chronically under-resourced, I think that most Canberra drivers would like to see more emphasis on driving problems other than speeding. Especially tailgating, because the material and personal costs of front to rear crashes is substantial.

“Especially tailgating, because the material and personal costs of front to rear crashes is substantial.”

Yes, my car was written off about a fortnight ago, by a tail-ender, and the person following was not following that closely. Just shows how much distance is needed to stop suddenly. It was the driver in front of me who stopped suddenly that caused all this. I only just managed to miss them, by steering sharply left. Unfortunately the car behind me didn’t miss my car.

cbrmale said :

tim_c said :

Evilomlap said :

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

Take issue all you like – it doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. When was the last time you saw a Police car pull someone over for a traffic offence? When was the last time you saw a traffic offence that they probably should have at least been cautioned on? Why have rules if they’re not going to be enforced?

I’m not blaming the Police for not doing their job – they are doing what they’re given budget to do (what’s left after funding the legacy projects of various Canberra City councillors) and what they’re instructed to do by a government that thinks it can solve all the traffic chaos with a few speed cameras, speed bumps and ever reducing speed limits, 60km/h, then 50, then 40, now 30km/h. Any one who drives with their eyes open will tell you it’s not working. The statistics tell us it’s not working.

If only road “accidents” were treated with the same seriousness as accidents with other workplace equipment or even firearms, we might see the number of deaths and injuries on our roads reducing.

You’re absolutely right, and the number one issue to be dealt with is tailgating. When I managed a fleet I had to take cars for assessment at AAMI and there were maybe 300 cars there, and about 49% of those cars had the front smashed in and about 49% had the rear smashed in.

The only time I ever see police enforcing road rules is when they have the speed guns out. All other roads rules: tailgating, failing to give way, failing to use indicators, driving unroadworthy cars; are basically unenforced. While the police are chronically under-resourced, I think that most Canberra drivers would like to see more emphasis on driving problems other than speeding. Especially tailgating, because the material and personal costs of front to rear crashes is substantial.

Other infringements are too hard for police to prove in court if challenged. Speeding is the easiest to prove as it has the evidence. Also the overheads for speeding are lower. Police sit in a known spot and radar people. Done.

The days of police driving around and pinging people for other things is long gone. If police are driving, it means they are going from the station to call, like a theft or domestic or something. They don’t just drive around looking anymore. They just turn a blind eye, unless it’s an accident, and no other police are there.

To be honest, they really could outsource speeding functions.

cranky said :

I have had a dashcam for a couple of years now.
Had a total idiot carve me up on Mugga Lane, who had to come back to the same speed as the rest of the traffic immediately. He knew he had buggered up, and I tapped the camera as he looked in his rear vision mirror.

What a transformation.

Strictly to the speed limit. Perfectly in his lane. I was chuffed by the result.

I still haven’t got one of these things. Some, with their bracket, seem so large they must block/hinder the drivers view. Couldn’t you skittle someone unwisely stepping off the footpath.
And do they record speed as well ? as seemingly indicated by your the Mugga Lane quote.

tim_c said :

Evilomlap said :

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

Take issue all you like – it doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. When was the last time you saw a Police car pull someone over for a traffic offence? When was the last time you saw a traffic offence that they probably should have at least been cautioned on? Why have rules if they’re not going to be enforced?

I’m not blaming the Police for not doing their job – they are doing what they’re given budget to do (what’s left after funding the legacy projects of various Canberra City councillors) and what they’re instructed to do by a government that thinks it can solve all the traffic chaos with a few speed cameras, speed bumps and ever reducing speed limits, 60km/h, then 50, then 40, now 30km/h. Any one who drives with their eyes open will tell you it’s not working. The statistics tell us it’s not working.

If only road “accidents” were treated with the same seriousness as accidents with other workplace equipment or even firearms, we might see the number of deaths and injuries on our roads reducing.

You’re absolutely right, and the number one issue to be dealt with is tailgating. When I managed a fleet I had to take cars for assessment at AAMI and there were maybe 300 cars there, and about 49% of those cars had the front smashed in and about 49% had the rear smashed in.

The only time I ever see police enforcing road rules is when they have the speed guns out. All other roads rules: tailgating, failing to give way, failing to use indicators, driving unroadworthy cars; are basically unenforced. While the police are chronically under-resourced, I think that most Canberra drivers would like to see more emphasis on driving problems other than speeding. Especially tailgating, because the material and personal costs of front to rear crashes is substantial.

Antagonist said :

As a general rule of thumb, my answer is no. At the same time, long term Rioters will remember the outcome achieved when the MAMILs got their lycra all twisted up over the epic Jims Mowing incident.

Just out of interest, what dashcams can people recommend? Preferably one that will record good quality forward and rear vision?

I have a Vicovation Marcus 5 which records high definition front and rear onto a single SD card, and it was the only HD front and rear camera I could find. I had to adjust the exposure of the front camera for Canberra’s bright sunshine or else it filmed tinged blue. The aggressive tailgating that you will see out of a rear camera can be frightening at times.

Yesterday I had a near miss: I always look for eye contact and I got eye contact, but she pulled out when I was just metres away. I had already planned a potential escape route so a certain smash was avoided, although if I had been prevented from crossing to the opposite side of the road then things would have been different. She was a P plate driver and this was worth a visit to the police, and posting the clip on Road Shamer Australia.

Given the circumstances of my near miss I am 99.9% certain that the young female driver did not have the capacity to calculate speed and distance, and this is not the first time I have come across novice drivers in the ACT who do not have basic speed and distance perception. I believe that competency-based assessment is fundamentally flawed in that it requires assessment by the instructor who the learner is paying in order to get their licence. As a result there is the potential for incompetent drivers such as my young driver yesterday being able to get their licences. I would prefer competency-based assessment be augmented by an independent assessment of their driving skills.

Evilomlap said :

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

Take issue all you like – it doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. When was the last time you saw a Police car pull someone over for a traffic offence? When was the last time you saw a traffic offence that they probably should have at least been cautioned on? Why have rules if they’re not going to be enforced?

I’m not blaming the Police for not doing their job – they are doing what they’re given budget to do (what’s left after funding the legacy projects of various Canberra City councillors) and what they’re instructed to do by a government that thinks it can solve all the traffic chaos with a few speed cameras, speed bumps and ever reducing speed limits, 60km/h, then 50, then 40, now 30km/h. Any one who drives with their eyes open will tell you it’s not working. The statistics tell us it’s not working.

If only road “accidents” were treated with the same seriousness as accidents with other workplace equipment or even firearms, we might see the number of deaths and injuries on our roads reducing.

As a general rule of thumb, my answer is no. At the same time, long term Rioters will remember the outcome achieved when the MAMILs got their lycra all twisted up over the epic Jims Mowing incident.

Just out of interest, what dashcams can people recommend? Preferably one that will record good quality forward and rear vision?

Evilomlap said :

tim_c said :

If road users could see the Police taking an active role in enforcing traffic rules, the public wouldn’t feel such a need to take matters into their own hands

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

You will find, probably already do, that the Police cant win with the public. At the moment the internet is cluttered by complaints about speed cameras. A common complaint being “Police presence will deter speeders more than cameras”. Apart from many logistical errors in this claim you can guarantee if the Govt actually pushed this through the next round of complaints would be Police booking speeders instead of doing “real” work. I imagine thats the point of a lot of the Police reality shows that make the rounds. To show that Police deal with all sorts of dross on a daily basis.

tim_c said :

If road users could see the Police taking an active role in enforcing traffic rules, the public wouldn’t feel such a need to take matters into their own hands

I really take issue with these complaints about the ‘lack of police presence’ in the ACT. I know and have worked with ACT police at varying levels. They do the absolute best they can with the limited resources at their disposal, and the police you want out policing minor traffic offences 24/7 have no say in the allocation of those resources. If the choice is between ‘monitoring’ some hoon more closely, or attending a domestic violence 000 call, it’s obvious which one the ONE patrol car available for the entire northside that night (because the two others are tied up blocking off lanes at a traffic collision on Belconnen Way) is going to be dispatched to.

I can guarantee you police presence at any call out is never because of a lack of dedication or because they can’t be bothered, it’s because they are busy doing something else that is more important at that particular moment. Believe me they would love to be able to dedicate a whole car for a whole day to drive around targeting bad drivers but unfortunately they just can’t do it.

Name and shame on social media? No. Anyone who does that is basically employing anti-social media. If you don’t want it to be you outed and shamed on social media (and anyone who takes a dislike to your driving or other road habits is equally likely to shame you in a similar fashion), be a bit circumspect (and a little more targeted) with your complaint. If the offence/road-rage causing incident is caused by an identifiable vehicle then call the company concerned and make a complaint. I have done this twice (hello taxi driver who,very early one morning many years ago went through a red light on Limestone Avenue and nearly mowed me down; and hello company van driver who harassed and terrified a totally law-abiding cyclist (not me) on the Defence roundabout). Using social media for this purpose (as indeed for many others) is crude, over the top and pointless.

creative_canberran said :

Innovation said :

tim_c said :

Innovation said :

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

They already do this – if you report something via the crimestoppers online form, and the offence is considered serious enough, they will either investigate directly (ie. if someone runs you off the road because they’re talking on the phone), or if less they may put an alert against the registration. If they get enough alerts, they will apparently “monitor” that particular vehicle more closely.

It still burns me that when we were hit, the driver stopped, mouthed an apology and then drove off. We put in a police report but obviously the other driver didn’t. The police wouldn’t give us any details of the other driver and, when we tried to FOI the accident report all we would have got was a copy of our own report. The police didn’t even phone the other driver to ask them why they didn’t submit a report – let alone pursue the (alleged) offence. The behaviour of the other driver was a fair indication that they made a habit of hitting other cars and driving off. I’m trying to be generous in suggesting that police don’t have the IT respources sufficient to allow them to identify a pattern of behaviour or else why wouldn’t they at least make a phone call to the other driver or pay them a visit.

What did your insurer say? They have their own databases and as the one who pays, has a lot more clout for getting the other driver.

Unfortunately, the risk of excess and subsequent increased premiums (vs the cost of the damage for a still safe and driveable vehicle) wasn’t worth pursuing with the insurer. as well I have had two other experiences where the insurer readily takes the excess in the first instance and doesn’t make much effort to pursue the other at fault driver. Aalthough after much effort, because I could identify the other drivers in those accidents – and I had a dash cam in the second of those accidents – I won the disputes with the insurers in both of those cases.

creative_canberran5:14 pm 06 Aug 15

Innovation said :

tim_c said :

Innovation said :

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

They already do this – if you report something via the crimestoppers online form, and the offence is considered serious enough, they will either investigate directly (ie. if someone runs you off the road because they’re talking on the phone), or if less they may put an alert against the registration. If they get enough alerts, they will apparently “monitor” that particular vehicle more closely.

It still burns me that when we were hit, the driver stopped, mouthed an apology and then drove off. We put in a police report but obviously the other driver didn’t. The police wouldn’t give us any details of the other driver and, when we tried to FOI the accident report all we would have got was a copy of our own report. The police didn’t even phone the other driver to ask them why they didn’t submit a report – let alone pursue the (alleged) offence. The behaviour of the other driver was a fair indication that they made a habit of hitting other cars and driving off. I’m trying to be generous in suggesting that police don’t have the IT respources sufficient to allow them to identify a pattern of behaviour or else why wouldn’t they at least make a phone call to the other driver or pay them a visit.

What did your insurer say? They have their own databases and as the one who pays, has a lot more clout for getting the other driver.

creative_canberran4:21 pm 06 Aug 15

tim_c said :

If dealing with a company, it is most appropriate to contact that company directly in the first instance. Give them time to respond and decide what to do based on the response you get. I’ve had encouraging responses from a couple of companies who seem to understand that not all publicity is good publicity.

I was run off a roundabout a couple of year back by a mini-bus belonging to a local firm. Management took the complaint quite seriously when I told them. They appreciated that someone driving so dangerously in a vehicle with their livery wasn’t good advertising.

tim_c said :

Innovation said :

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

They already do this – if you report something via the crimestoppers online form, and the offence is considered serious enough, they will either investigate directly (ie. if someone runs you off the road because they’re talking on the phone), or if less they may put an alert against the registration. If they get enough alerts, they will apparently “monitor” that particular vehicle more closely.

It still burns me that when we were hit, the driver stopped, mouthed an apology and then drove off. We put in a police report but obviously the other driver didn’t. The police wouldn’t give us any details of the other driver and, when we tried to FOI the accident report all we would have got was a copy of our own report. The police didn’t even phone the other driver to ask them why they didn’t submit a report – let alone pursue the (alleged) offence. The behaviour of the other driver was a fair indication that they made a habit of hitting other cars and driving off. I’m trying to be generous in suggesting that police don’t have the IT respources sufficient to allow them to identify a pattern of behaviour or else why wouldn’t they at least make a phone call to the other driver or pay them a visit.

CBRDan said :

…Some of the things you see people do you do wish there was an AFP upload your evidence service. Even if the police couldn’t prove enough for a conviction and just showed up on the persons door and showed them the video it would make them think twice about doing it again.

I was previously instructed by ACT Police to load such videos to youtube as unlisted (so they’re not public), and then send the link to ACT Police (you can do this via the crimestoppers online form, which also has facility to upload images eg. a snapshot from your video). You may never hear back, but you can see how many times it’s been viewed, and if the Police are the only people you’ve given the link to, you know when they’ve at least looked at it.

Innovation said :

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

They already do this – if you report something via the crimestoppers online form, and the offence is considered serious enough, they will either investigate directly (ie. if someone runs you off the road because they’re talking on the phone), or if less they may put an alert against the registration. If they get enough alerts, they will apparently “monitor” that particular vehicle more closely.

If dealing with a company, it is most appropriate to contact that company directly in the first instance. Give them time to respond and decide what to do based on the response you get. I’ve had encouraging responses from a couple of companies who seem to understand that not all publicity is good publicity.

Having said that, had a certain lawn mowing franchise not been so publicly named and shamed (including some air time on this site) in June 2012, based on other experiences, I doubt to this day whether ACT Police would have felt quite so compelled to step in.

And where are the Police in Canberra?

I have been the victim of 2 road rage incidents where I was not at fault in any way.
One in a 40klm school zone at 3.30 with kids everywhere. A delivery drive was flying along in a hurry and misjudged his overtaking and clipped me. Then he got out of his car and thumped me yelling he didn’t have time for this S#*t and then drove off. With the name of the company on his van. I never even got a word out. The police attended his work but they didn’t charge him because he claimed I called him a black C.. Which never happened. Those words would never come out of my mouth. I wish I had a dash cam that day.
The second was a drunk driver who clipped me trying to overtake.. The driver was so drunk he could hardly stand or walk when he came to abuse me. He couldn’t even yell at me properly he was so plastered. I didn’t get out of the car. The police did not attend (years before mobiles. I had to go home to report it). I filled a report and they followed up a few days later. He got away free as a bird. I wish I had a dash cam that day.
As soon as these devices became available I bought one. And I would not hesitate to name and shame either of these drivers. Mine is a dual camera one. One camera points at me and behind the other out the front. Some of the things you see people do you do wish there was an AFP upload your evidence service. Even if the police couldn’t prove enough for a conviction and just showed up on the persons door and showed them the video it would make them think twice about doing it again.

If road users could see the Police taking an active role in enforcing traffic rules, the public wouldn’t feel such a need to take matters into their own hands

No, and don’t waste the Police’ time by calling up and reporting a near accident either. They don’t issue traffic offences based on anonymous civilian reports.

Suck it up, deal with it, and concentrate on your own driving.

Innovation said :

cbrmale said :

Innovation said :

Alexandra Craig said :

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

I agree with regular driving tests. Even online theory tests at license renewal would be better than what we have now. However, testing based on age (or even increased regularity) is discriminatory.

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

The police do collect statistics on complaints about drivers but are largely powerless to act because unless there is corroborating evidence such as a film clip, it’s always a case of ”he said” ”she said”. This is where dash cams and helmet cams can be of use, except in my experience the ACT police just don’t have the resources to follow up on filmed examples of extremely dangerous driving.

I doubt the police collate statistics electronically (including donated video feed and/or cross referenced accident reports) in a database linked to registration or license numbers (including validated details of others who make the complaints). Surely iff there were enough random complaints (eg 50, 100 or even a 1000) about a driver the police would soon find the resources to investigate further.

From experience, I know that the police don’t pursue missing accident reports (which is an offence in itself) but perhaps they would if a database spat out that a car is regularly and allegedly reported as the other vehicle in an accident but the owner/driver never submits accident reports.

They do collate intelligence about car registration numbers and drivers; absolutely 100% guaranteed they do.

To take a transgressor to court is a hugely time-consuming undertaking and not done lightly. They have to take statements from the accused and from all witnesses, serve subpoenas when the court date approaches, prepare a brief for the prosecutor and attend court on the day. To justify the time to do all that it has to be a big offence and almost guaranteed of success. A missing accident report would not justify that amount of effort.

If they do take an offender to court even with film evidence the magistrate will give a suspended sentence as they do, and it’s been virtually a waste of time. You can guess why I know this.

cbrmale said :

Innovation said :

Alexandra Craig said :

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

I agree with regular driving tests. Even online theory tests at license renewal would be better than what we have now. However, testing based on age (or even increased regularity) is discriminatory.

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

The police do collect statistics on complaints about drivers but are largely powerless to act because unless there is corroborating evidence such as a film clip, it’s always a case of ”he said” ”she said”. This is where dash cams and helmet cams can be of use, except in my experience the ACT police just don’t have the resources to follow up on filmed examples of extremely dangerous driving.

I doubt the police collate statistics electronically (including donated video feed and/or cross referenced accident reports) in a database linked to registration or license numbers (including validated details of others who make the complaints). Surely iff there were enough random complaints (eg 50, 100 or even a 1000) about a driver the police would soon find the resources to investigate further.

From experience, I know that the police don’t pursue missing accident reports (which is an offence in itself) but perhaps they would if a database spat out that a car is regularly and allegedly reported as the other vehicle in an accident but the owner/driver never submits accident reports.

Innovation said :

Alexandra Craig said :

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

I agree with regular driving tests. Even online theory tests at license renewal would be better than what we have now. However, testing based on age (or even increased regularity) is discriminatory.

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

The police do collect statistics on complaints about drivers but are largely powerless to act because unless there is corroborating evidence such as a film clip, it’s always a case of ”he said” ”she said”. This is where dash cams and helmet cams can be of use, except in my experience the ACT police just don’t have the resources to follow up on filmed examples of extremely dangerous driving.

Dash cams are fantastic. And yes we probably should have a federal system whereby the data is collected. I mean, why not. It’s real time surveillance.

For those with a spare minute, check this out, reminds me of driving to and from the coast. This shows how close innocent drivers coming the other way are often defenceless to harm.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-LxrIw14kRQ

Innovation said :

Alexandra Craig said :

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

I agree with regular driving tests. Even online theory tests at license renewal would be better than what we have now. However, testing based on age (or even increased regularity) is discriminatory.

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

I agree with that. However, we don’t even have to (discouraged to) report accidents these days, unless someone is injured. I once had someone run into the back of me with her new Mercedes (she had had it three days), who from comments did this regularly, which made me wonder if she should be driving. “Please don’t report me to the police. I don’t want another report. Take your car to these crash repairers. I’ll pay. they know me. I sent the last person there.” The crash repairers did know her, and told me to bring the car in, as no worries, she’ll pay. True story. In that case, I did report her.

Alexandra Craig said :

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

I agree with regular driving tests. Even online theory tests at license renewal would be better than what we have now. However, testing based on age (or even increased regularity) is discriminatory.

Rather than naming or shaming, the police should have sufficient IT resources to manage and record complaints against license numbers and then investigate after a designated number of random complaints or based on severity of complaints. Irresponsible drivers have a habit of making the same (deliberate) mistakes over and over again.

pink little birdie8:39 pm 04 Aug 15

It always amazes me the number people who will speed, cut people off and park illegally when they have a business name on the car or their sports club or community group splashed across the back windscreen.

I have had a dashcam for a couple of years now.
Had a total idiot carve me up on Mugga Lane, who had to come back to the same speed as the rest of the traffic immediately. He knew he had buggered up, and I tapped the camera as he looked in his rear vision mirror.

What a transformation.

Strictly to the speed limit. Perfectly in his lane. I was chuffed by the result.

gazket said :

Lefty social media types whip up a bee hives and name and shame all the time. There main aim is for targets too loose their job. They will even take casualties to prove their point .

nothing new here

What you have written here gives the impression that you don’t want anyone removed from a job involving driving, even if their driving is so bad they are a danger on the road. I don’t think it is okay to scare and endanger other drivers by dangerous driving. If someone doesn’t want to lose their job, don’t drive badly.

Lefty social media types whip up a bee hives and name and shame all the time. There main aim is for targets too loose their job. They will even take casualties to prove their point .

nothing new here

Alexandra Craig said :

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

I think that if any tests are given, the number of tests should reflect statistics for who has the accidents, not presumptions.

I have posted film clips of bad Canberra driving online, as do others. Some of my film clips were so shocking that I was contacted by a national television network and was interviewed, and high definition versions of my clips will be shown nation-wide in due course. That’s naming and shaming.

In reality when selfish and aggressive drivers realise that every other car on the road could be filming them and there can be consequences in that, then that may make our roads safer. That’s why I agreed to be interviewed and that was one of the points I made.

Alexandra Craig3:05 pm 04 Aug 15

Evilomlap said :

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I agree with this. I said to someone the other day that there should be periodic driving tests in order to retain a licence, and the period between the tests should get smaller once the driver reaches a certain age. The person I was talking to told me I was being ridiculous but I really don’t think my proposal is that controversial.

Solidarity said :

A big, huge resounding no from me.

Social media is nothing more that a wagon full of morons, and when that bandwagon gets going, nothing will stop it, even 20 ton truth bombs.

Too hard to separate truth from sensationalism, and there is always two sides to a story.

Yet here you are on social media.

A big, huge resounding no from me.

Social media is nothing more that a wagon full of morons, and when that bandwagon gets going, nothing will stop it, even 20 ton truth bombs.

Too hard to separate truth from sensationalism, and there is always two sides to a story.

The question is so late it’s irrelevant. In this age of dash cams and YouTube people are being publically shamed anyway. There are sites springing up every week to post dash cam vids and ‘name and shame’ people. I haven’t seen many, but I dare say not many are bothering to shade out people’s number plates or faces.

Maybe let’s spend less time berating other road users and focus on ourselves. I read a study a few years back where people who had their licences for more than ten years sat a written driving test. Something like 9 out of 10 people failed. Simple stuff like who has right of way if the traffic lights are out, merging, how to use indicators etc.

Pilots have to sit tests periodically to prove they are still competent. The number of people killed on the roads far exceeds the number killed in plane crashes. Drivers should have to do that same thing. I find the concept of sitting one test when you’re 17 and then never being tested again a bit ridiculous. I reckon the cost to benefit ratio of this would even out, given that it would probably prevent heaps of minor accidents that are caused by simple ignorance of road rules or people making innocent mistakes.

I voted for Yes, but it’s a bit more complex than that.

The guideline for me here is to analyse risk vs. benefit and decide from that, i.e., what are the risks we would create in having the community policing ourselves, versus what are the benefits. In this case, especially because police, at least in my own experience, have zero interest in following up on actual incidents even those accompanied with hard evidence (e.g., dash cams / cyclists helmet cams), using the collective power of the community would be an overall improvement.

Yes, we do run the risk of mob justice with all the unjustifiable allegations it brings with it, and that would still be better than today’s situation in which we share our roads with some serious dangerous individuals who should not be allowed to drive (not because they lack driving skills, rather because they lack any concern for other road users).

Ultimately, the police should take over by creating a channel with the community allowing us to hand over evidence for them to follow up. When that happens, I’d vote No for this suggestion; until then, it’s a Yes for me.

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.