23 June 2011

Speed Checks and Signage

23 June 2011 | Greywolf20k

Firstly can I say that I have huge respect for our men and woman in blue and they do a great job. Driving around today I noticed a police car doing speed checks about 100 metres from a speed sign from 80km to 60km and I started to wonder what the distance is for these checks to be done from a speed sign.

Is there a legislation that governs this and should people be slamming their breaks on as they pass these signs to adhere to the road rules? I am sure the officers that were doing the checks are aware of the laws but you never know.

Join the conversation

145

All Comments

All Comments
Website Comments
Facebook Comments

LatestOldest

Monomyth1:35 pm 29 Jun 11

My driving instructor told me you had to be doing the speed limit when you get to the sign, and not afterward, so whether it’s 1 metre or 100, it’ still lawful. A Canberran driving actully FOLLOWING this rule is a different matter all together!

shadow boxer6:10 pm 27 Jun 11

Disinformation said :

shadow boxer said :

Wikipedia is your friend,

I knew what the term meant well over ten years ago. The idea was to see if the user knew what it was. It’s a bit lame to ask for a meaning on the Internet when you could just type the term into google. Realistically though, if the general brainpower of the average Internet users was slightly greater, it would kill a lot of online forums.. Why should people read an instruction manual, or search for an answer when they can go to a forum, type a question in and then wait for some patient fool to encourage their lack of self help by telling them what they want to know?

Well the op used it correctly so you would assume he did

Holden Caulfield5:18 pm 27 Jun 11

Postalgeek said :

1-Without knowing the intersection in question, generally the approaches to pedestrians crossings are unobscured so I wouldn’t immediately accept the assertion that the cyclist came out of ‘nowhere’

2- technically if you had hit the car in front of you you would have only had yourself to blame.

3-car drivers failing to slow for or even observe pedestrian crossings is more of a problem than cyclists riding across them.

The crossing near the O’Connor shops has parking spaces very close to it on the same side of the road as the shops. When driving along Macpherson St, towards Lyenham (shops on your right) cyclists and pedestrians can be obscured from view by parked cars next to All Bar Nun. They can be two or three steps on to the crossing before being visible. If a cyclist rode across quickly then they could easily surprise an oncoming motorist.

However, you’re right in point 3, though and it’s generally good practice to be extra vigilant and exercise more caution than usual when approaching this particular crossing (or any others like it).

Spideydog5:00 pm 27 Jun 11

Disinformation said :

if the general brainpower of the average Internet users was slightly greater, it would kill a lot of online forums..

Nooooo, say it isn’t so ……….

Disinformation4:51 pm 27 Jun 11

shadow boxer said :

Wikipedia is your friend,

I knew what the term meant well over ten years ago. The idea was to see if the user knew what it was. It’s a bit lame to ask for a meaning on the Internet when you could just type the term into google. Realistically though, if the general brainpower of the average Internet users was slightly greater, it would kill a lot of online forums.. Why should people read an instruction manual, or search for an answer when they can go to a forum, type a question in and then wait for some patient fool to encourage their lack of self help by telling them what they want to know?

johnboy10:22 am 27 Jun 11

Well, for those taking such an interest in my life, I only sold the car last year, and I do drive other people’s cars reasonably often.

Classified10:21 am 27 Jun 11

(Actually, I’m lucky I double checked that last post, because I made a typo originally that referred to ‘feces’ rather than ‘faces’)…:)

Classified10:20 am 27 Jun 11

I always thought a fascist was someone who discriminated based on faces.

shadow boxer10:15 am 27 Jun 11

Wikipedia is your friend, the meaning of the word has changed from the literal.

The word fascist is sometimes used to denigrate people, institutions, or groups that would not describe themselves as ideologically fascist, and that may not fall within the formal definition of the word. The Fascist party that developed in Italy in the 1920s rigidly enforced conservative values and behavior norms during the Mussolini regime. As a political epithet, fascist was subsequently used in an anti-authoritarian sense to emphasize the common ideology of governmental suppression of individual freedom, as shared by other groups on the extreme right. Eventually members of those right wing groups, and other sympathizers, began to broaden the use of fascist and confuse the meaning by applying the term to groups on the far left that strongly advocate behavior that promotes respect for those who deviate from perceived norms and/or advocate participation in the development of opportunities for oppressed people. It has also been applied to a broad range of people and groups, including people of many religious faiths, particularly fundamentalist groups. The individual, institution, or group(s) called fascist often find the use of the term in this way to be highly offensive and inappropriate.

In this sense, the word fascist is intended to mean “oppressive”, “intolerant”, “chauvinist”, “genocidal”, “dictatorial”, “racist”, or “aggressive” – all concepts that are allegedly inspired by the ideology of actual fascism, and pervasive through fascist states. One might accuse an inconveniently placed police roadblock as being a “fascist tactic” for its perceived oppression or interloping, or an overly authoritarian teacher as being “a total fascist”. Terms like Nazi and Hitlerite, are often used in similar contexts.

Classified10:11 am 27 Jun 11

Henry82 said :

Classified said :

And also because (also by your own admission) you don’t own a car, hence I wouldn’t expect you to do much regular driving anymore.

It’s possible to drive regularly without owning a car. Also, you can still get pulled over for speeding on a bike.

Possible, but both are unlikely.

Watson9:13 am 25 Jun 11

Mr Gillespie said :

Have you ever watched those items on Today Tonight or A Current Affair about how speed cameras defraud people out of their money? Hm? I betcha you flick that OFF switch whenever you see something like that appearing on TV.

I really couldn’t be bothered reading all 4 pages in this ludicrously long post about a trivial topic, but hahahahaha! That was just such a classic. I love it!

I once got done for speeding twice in a month by the same red light/speed camera. The one on the corner of Northbourne Ave and Barry Drive. I think I got clocked going 72kph on one occasion.

I was quite shocked because I am one of those people who will try to stick to the speed limit fairly religiously. Then I realised I had the bad habit of speeding up when the light went orange when I was driving to and from work. I was always in a hurry back then and didn’t want to lose a minute by having to stop at the lights. And apparently I sped up more than I realised to make it through. But even though I was absolutely sure that I had only gone over the speed limit for a few metres – I actually braked as soon as I reached the other side of the intersection – a rule is a rule and I broke it. You can’t seriously expect the police to go examine everyone’s individual circumstances before they hand out fines? They’d have to hire a whole new team for that! Traffic rules were designed to be very black and white just for that purpose: to make it very easy to decide when they are broken and who is at fault..

It taught me a lesson and I will now never speed up when the light goes orange.

And how many people haven’t rear-ended cars and thought it was actually the other car’s fault because they hit the breaks for no apparent reason? I know I have. But because the rule regarding who’s at fault is so black and white, I realised that it was futile to argue about it, so I politely gave the other person my details, accepted the blame and MOVED ON!

This really is such a totally trivial topic. Why on earth would anyone get that frustrated by the speed limit being 10kph less than you think it should be?

Spideydog4:02 pm 24 Jun 11

The_Bulldog said :

Mt two cents – I’m aware the process regarding posted speed limits USED to be based on the following standards: Roads are engineered (surface grades, camber, width, storm-water) to be safe at particular speeds in particular environmental conditions. This indicative speed is examined by a team within ACT gov’t who assesses factors such as car and pedestrian traffic, and zoning (residential/commerical/industrial). From there the information will run through a risk-based model whereby a standard is applied and a speed limit is determined – which is inveitably considerably less than the road is engineered for (for obvious reasons). If Gillepsie is using comparable science to establish his “common-sense” appraisal of when speed limits are too low then I’ll eat my frickin’ hat.

It is staggering to think someone would actually believe that in the midst of this process, the recommendations regarding proposed speed limits are submitted to a team or person who will assess the likelihood of being able to entrap motorists for revenue purposes, and approve or deny a recommended speed limit. Seriously – WTF is on your weet-bix?

Whether you agree with the speed-limit or not – you’re a clown if you don’t abide by them, as you will only lighten your pockets and potentially endanger those road users who decide to do the right thing. This has nothing to do with the Government attacking our civil liberties – this is about the commom good.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like the thought of revenue raising under the guise of safety and law enforcement any more than Gillepsie does – and there are fixed speed cameras which can only make one wonder about the choice of placement and the actual risk posed by speeding in these areas (see Tuggeranong Parkway – but that’s only my opinion). Where I do differ (significantly) from Gillepsie is how I choose to handle it – and that is by obeying the law whether I agree with it or not, and protesting through safe means (i.e. writing to my local council member).

If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Gillepsie – rather than driving have you thought about using a recumbent bicycle?

Very well said. I would contend that fixed speed cameras should only really be used at 2 locations:

1. Known black spots (actual blackspots mind you)
2. School zones.

In my opinion, speed cameras are only of use for a 500m stretch of road, thats why school zones are perfect.

The_Bulldog3:34 pm 24 Jun 11

Mt two cents – I’m aware the process regarding posted speed limits USED to be based on the following standards: Roads are engineered (surface grades, camber, width, storm-water) to be safe at particular speeds in particular environmental conditions. This indicative speed is examined by a team within ACT gov’t who assesses factors such as car and pedestrian traffic, and zoning (residential/commerical/industrial). From there the information will run through a risk-based model whereby a standard is applied and a speed limit is determined – which is inveitably considerably less than the road is engineered for (for obvious reasons). If Gillepsie is using comparable science to establish his “common-sense” appraisal of when speed limits are too low then I’ll eat my frickin’ hat.

It is staggering to think someone would actually believe that in the midst of this process, the recommendations regarding proposed speed limits are submitted to a team or person who will assess the likelihood of being able to entrap motorists for revenue purposes, and approve or deny a recommended speed limit. Seriously – WTF is on your weet-bix?

Whether you agree with the speed-limit or not – you’re a clown if you don’t abide by them, as you will only lighten your pockets and potentially endanger those road users who decide to do the right thing. This has nothing to do with the Government attacking our civil liberties – this is about the commom good.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t like the thought of revenue raising under the guise of safety and law enforcement any more than Gillepsie does – and there are fixed speed cameras which can only make one wonder about the choice of placement and the actual risk posed by speeding in these areas (see Tuggeranong Parkway – but that’s only my opinion). Where I do differ (significantly) from Gillepsie is how I choose to handle it – and that is by obeying the law whether I agree with it or not, and protesting through safe means (i.e. writing to my local council member).

If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Gillepsie – rather than driving have you thought about using a recumbent bicycle?

Mr Gillespie12:54 pm 24 Jun 11

Disinformation said :

Mr Gillespie, you’ve provided much evidence to my theory that some people assume that their stance on rejection of authority will be supported by popular opinion.
When voicing an opinion that combines your personal viewpoint on legality, public safety and your interpretation of it’s machinations, it pays to know your audience particularly well. The Internet is not as full of rebellious teenagers as you’d like to think, but the world is full of people who have the approved authority to forcefully dissuade you from continually doing what YOU feel is appropriate. Welcome to reality.
I fully accept that there are police with measuring devices who will check my speed against that which has been ordained to be appropriate for the circumstances. I accept that risk and adjust my behaviour accordingly. Conversely, when I change my behaviour, I also weigh up the risk. This ensures that there is a minimum chance of me being caught driving over the speed limit. Whether that be from 1kph over in a school zone, or 152 kph over the limit on the open road.

It’s a matter of aligning your perception of acceptable risk with anyone else that knows about it.
The instant that car is moving, you’ve taken a risk. If you can’t mitigate your risk, then you have the right to pay as many speeding fines as you deem appropriate. The thought of which provides me with almost as much entertainment as seeing flashing red and blue lights behind someone else’s car.

So when you see “the man” with the laser speed gun hiding in the bushes and slam your brakes on, it won’t worry me at all. I’ll be maintaining an appropriate safe braking distance plus an SAFD (Standard Allowance For D***heads)

Is it my “right” to pay as many speeding fines as what’s deemed appropriate? That’s like saying it’s your right to give up your freedoms when the Government takes them away for WHATEVER reason. You sure have a funny way of putting it.

Why does it give you so much “entertainment” seeing someone being pulled over by blue and red flashing lights? How do you know what he is being pulled over for? For all you know it could be someone who has committed a GENUINE crime, like outstanding warrants for drugs, armed robbery suspects, or whatever. How do you know???

00davist12:00 am 24 Jun 11

No, pointing out immaturity is not immature, deciding you don’t agree with a rule, so your going to break it, is immature!

if you have an issue with a speed zone, find others who share your view, and petition for an increase, if enough people agree its to slow, they will review it.

Unless you have qualifications or experience in the field though, there is allot of points you may not be considering.

Although you may not believe it i DO believe some roads are to slow, and i have been involved in successful appeals of speed zones in the past (one such example was a road that had been widened, straightened and smoothed, but had not been reviewed to reflect this, it was raised 30km after we petitioned)

However it is NOT a sensible way of fighting against roads that are too slow, to simply say “I’ll do what i want” and then getting booked! No rules change, you give them more reason to police the area, and keep the speed down, and, you empty your pockets!

It’s not entrapment, if it was, then why are so many people able to do it right without any trouble!

As for being over one Km, they wont book you, there is a 3km buffer, and on top of that, discretion.

My point with the speed minus the sign = Zero was how easy it is to not speed!

Personally, my biggest issue is the damn warnings for fixed speed cameras, sure, make sure the speed limit is clear near them, but don’t tell people they are there, HIDE THEM!

Seriously, my tax dollars pay to fit a speed camera, then they pay for the sign that makes it ineffective as everyone speeding slows for the camera, then speeds back up.

Now, Mr Gillespie, as far as i can see, you don’t want to face the fact that speeding, even by a little, is something the driver controls, so i’m not going to waste my time continuing to bicker with you, just don’t whinge to me when you pay the fines that i find so easy to avoid.

I will say this though, i am not suggesting for a moment that i am above this, i have myself sped, and a few months ago, i was booked, only yards from the start of the 100km zone, coming to Canberra from Braidwood, i started to speed up before the 100 sign.

I am not saying that i am without fault and you are, the difference is, in my case, i can see that the only person at fault was me, if i had been more attentive to my own speed, and shown more self control in the lead up to the 100 sign, i would have avoided a fine, and loss of points.

My actions, My responsibly, My stupidity, and My voluntarily payment!

Now, to one of the other issues raised, yes, according to both the ACT road rules, and the Australian road rules, the speed zone starts at exactly the point of its first sign, and ends exactly at the point of the first sign of the next zone, and you can not exceed the limit at any point in that zone.

Therefore, you should slow down in time to have reached the signposted limit, by the time you draw level with the sign, and should not increase beyond that limit till after you have passed the start of a faster zone.

View more conversations

Featured Businesses

Podiatrists

The Walking Clinic

The Walking Clinic has perpetuated an attitude of excellence in foot health provision. The experienced Podiatric team provide current and innovative care to all patients.

Find out more

Community Club

Canberra Southern Cross Club

We're proud to give you a place where friends and family can come together for good food and great entertainment.

Find out more

Mortgage Brokers

Clarity Home Loans

A passionate team of Canberrans helping other Canberrans secure their home loans. No frills, no commissions, no brainer.

Find out more

Lawyers

MV Law

Through a spirit of entrepreneurialism, collaboration, and future-forward thinking, MV Law have earned an industry-leading reputation.

Find out more

Insurance Brokers

allinsure

Allinsure has been a trusted insurance advisory to thousands of Australian business owners for almost 20 years.

Find out more

Lawyers

Kamy Saeedi Law

When you need a criminal or commercial lawyer, you don’t want to take any chances. You want someone in your corner that you can trust like your life depends on it - because it does.

Find out more

Lawyers

BDN Lawyers

BDN has provided legal services to to Canberra, Queanbeyan and the region for over 160 years.

Find out more

Electricians

True Connection Electrical

Since 2014, True Connection Electrical have been servicing residential and small commercial clients with reliable, trustworthy and top-quality electrical work.

Find out more