Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Daily flights from Canberra
to Singapore and the world

Speed sign on the northbound parkway speed camera

By thomped2 2 February 2010 30

Hi all, i would like to thank whoever put the 100kph speed sign on the northbound parkway speed camera (where the cotter crosses over).

This is a good idea and should be done to every static speed camera. its already been done for the speed vans. Think about it how many times have you been driving along and then just saw the camera and gone “WHAT SPPED IS IT?!?!?!?” and jammed on the brakes, especially if you from out of town.

Yes they put 3 big signs up on the way toward the camera remove them and put it on the darn thing! get straight to the point.

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
30 Responses to
Speed sign on the northbound parkway speed camera
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Punter 2:39 pm 04 Feb 10

Youami, I can see we’re going to disagree on this issue. You seem to be saying you’re a good driver so it’s okay to drive faster than the limit, whereas I beleive part of being a good driver means obeying the road rules including speed limits; they are there for a reason.

Clown killer, I didn’t miss your point. I am aware of the Coronial process involved with fatal collisions. My point is a proactive attitude to prevent injury and death is a better approach than learning our lessons after the fact through the findings of the Coroner. I also believe the Coroner is seeing less fatal crash matters than many years ago through advancements in vehicle safety technology and medical proceedures. Without having researched this, I’ll bet there have been increases in serious injury through such medical advancements which is a huge financial cost.

astrojax 2:04 pm 04 Feb 10

so you get to redefine ‘speeding’, youami..? who are you again? maybe i want to redefine murder as killing someone i like – so killing someone, if ever so slightly, i don’t like much is ok then…

if you’re not keen to conform to the motor traffic act and its regulations then perhaps you should hand in the licence issued to you, which binds you to do so, and give up driving on our public roads…

astrojax 2:00 pm 04 Feb 10

so you</i get to redefine 'speeding', youami, and that's ok.

i want to define 'murder' as killing someone i like, so if i don't like the person, killing them slightly is ok…

if you don't want to conform to the motor traffic act and its regulations then i suggest you hand back the licence issued to you and don't drive.

Deckard 12:25 pm 04 Feb 10

Punter said :

Clown Killer, it’s not appropriate to accept more deaths before the Coroner recommends anything regarding speeding. Does anyone remember this as one example?

Why don’t they have a speed camera where these kids died? Instead they have them sitting out on the Barton Hwy and Tuggeranong Parkway – 2 of the safest roads in Canberra.

bd84 11:42 am 04 Feb 10

The sign is a legacy of the protection screens on the cotter road bridge that the contractor forgot to take down. If you can’t notice the 3 huge 100kph speed camera signs starting about 1km before the camera, the you are an idiot. Although, it is more difficult to notice speed signs in busy built up areas, I have not come across a location like this in Canberra, only in Sydney or Melbourne.

Clown Killer 8:06 am 04 Feb 10

Punter, I think you mighthave missed my point. When someone is killed on the Territories roads the Coroners Office prepares a report detailing the circumstances of the fatality and making findings as to the cause of the fatality – why the crash happened and what factors contributed to the fatality – excessive speed is recognised as a causal factor from time to time but not very often, and certainly not with the frequency that trout-mouthing elected officials and office holders would like us to believe.

Punter 11:23 pm 03 Feb 10

Clown Killer, it’s not appropriate to accept more deaths before the Coroner recommends anything regarding speeding. Does anyone remember this as one example?

youami 10:54 pm 03 Feb 10

Punter said :

Youami, your attitude toward this issue is seriously misplaced. If by collateral damage you mean yourself or your family, myself or my family, or anyone else being seriously injured or killed, then I would argue that is an unacceptable consequence and you should reconsider if you should be driving on any road. It’s not the speed that’ll cause the serious injury or death, it’s the change in speed as occurs in crashes. The greater the change, the more the likelihood of injury or death. I’m not saying you’re a bad person, only I suspect you don’t appreciate all the consequences of your choice when you speed. I am pleased if you drive to the conditions of the road as you say. I assume that means you slow down and increase your stopping distance in the wet or when visibility is low. Remember, crashes occur outside of school zones also. You can leave your hat on, I’m not perfect, but I think I have a healthy attitude toward driving safely.

Let me clarify, the definition of speeding is driving above the posted speed limit even by 1km/h so yeah that is me. But I define ‘speeding’ in the sense of outside the boundaries of commonsense, ie. someone being reckless and/or exceeding the limit by a lot, say at least 10-20km/hour. So in a 60, travel at least 80, and so on. I travel, if I speed, I do not on principle drive that fast over the limit. Doesn’t make it right I hear you say but that doesn’t stop me from being a safe driver nor does it make me misplaced or live in fairyland because I know the consequences of reckless driving. But when I drive I observe the environment (and road signs) and travel at a speed that is not going to be a problem, if that means I am comfortable at a speed slightly higher than the posted limit I will do that, it is illegal but I will also wear that if I get caught. Conversely, I sometimes travel below the posted limit for the same reasons and observations, such as down Giles St where I travel at 40km/h even though it is 60km/h, etc etc. I am talking semantics here. And you assume correct, I slow down when required. Remember the old days when country roads had a ‘deregulation’ limit (the sign with black circle and line through it). There was no speed limit and drivers had to do exactly what I have said above, observe.

Let me also make it clear: I do not condone speeding at 100km/h (or whatever speed) in a 60km/h zone. That is reckless and most likely contrary to the road conditions.

Now to the point of ‘speed kills’: if I was to ever have an accident at 100km/h in a 100km/h zone I will most likely be seriously injured or killed no matter what purely due to the speed I am travelling –but the point I am making is that I am not speeding by definition I am just going fast.

… anyway, back to the OP, one must always know what the legal posted limit is otherwise they should not drive! I always know the posted limit regardless of how fast or slow I drive.

Clown Killer 8:18 pm 03 Feb 10

annoyedcan, I doubt that anybody is suggesting that excessive speed cannot occasionally be identified as the cause of a road fatality. What is contested is the endless trout-mouthing of speed as the cause of most fatalities in order to ‘sell’ electorate complacency on speed cameras.

If speed really was a big issue you could bet that the ACT Coroner would be making more recommendations to that effect.

astrojax 8:14 pm 03 Feb 10

if you’re unsure of the limit for the stretch of road you’re on, slow down to 40km/h; ain’t nowhere (mebbe carparks, shucks) where ypu’ll be pinged for speeding at 40km/h…

and yes, annoyedcan, while speeding kills, it is often speeding and another factor (tailgating, for one) that contribute to collisions: let’s all start calling them that – ain’t no accidents.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site