Speed Limit Tolerances to be Lowered in QLD

[Imago]

You'll find a lot of new cars are deliberately out of tolerance.

Most Subarus, Hyundais and Mazdas are also 9.9% out. ADRs stipulate that you cannot have a speedo reading under the actual road speed (ie displaying 100 when really travelling 101), however they can be out less than 10% the other way (displaying 109.9 when you are really doing 100). A mate I know returned his Mazda 6 back to the dealership and asked them to correct it but they showed him the right paperwork and that there is nothing actually 'wrong'.

It's not a safety thing, it just makes the services roll over faster...

QLD has gone silly with their new 'hooning' crap, and now this? What next, nanny road comfort noise comfort tax on any car producing more than 50dB?

[Trump]

Some more information on Tenix Solutions:

http://www.exfacie.com/?q=civic_comp...oria_explained

[loony888]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

I wasn't going to post in here anymore, but all that talk about voting, and making a noise made me think...

Two weeks ago, so called government policy brought about the end of Fords local manufacturing, and no one mentioned 'ringing your local representative' or 'voting 'em out' to make them change their trade policies to favour local manufacturing, yet threaten to target your wallets and your all up in arms...

so we're all supposed to altruistic to the point of thanking the govt. for fleecing us? Of course i'm up in arms, i work hard for my wage, being robbed by a high tech government sanctioned apparatus as opposed to a druggie with flick knife is still being robbed!

[Henryf6]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

...is it time for me to wheel out my usual statement about how speed detection devices used by the cops are the ONLY measuring instrument of any sort that is perfectly, absolutely, magically, 100% accurate in all circumstances with no margin for error possible? Even an atomic clock has a "plus or minus" allowance added after a measurement, but a hand held laser or radar gun in some cops wobbling hand in who-knows-what environmental conditions is always 100% dead-on accurate to the kilometer an hour with no variation.

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

[Trump]

Originally Posted by Henryf6

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

This is the sort of crap that makes my blood boil. And why we need to show Govco Pty Ltd the door.

[GTP-RPD]

Originally Posted by Henryf6

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

Hey mate do you have the right of appeal and can you get a better lawyer. I have never heard of anyone making a punt on anything without some form of observation eg a reference point to find a measure of something eg it took 3 seconds to travel 50 metres.

[Kable72]

^ I hope to god that's not true.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by EVLKNEVL

http://www.caradvice.com.au/231260/a...eral-election/

if they can get in and make a difference, they get my vote..

[Henryf6]

Originally Posted by GTP-RPD

Hey mate do you have the right of appeal and can you get a better lawyer. I have never heard of anyone making a punt on anything without some form of observation eg a reference point to find a measure of something eg it took 3 seconds to travel 50 metres.

This was about 4 years ago now. After this incident I reside to the fact that if they want to book you, they can and will. I am in QLD and I know the government needs the money.

You hear all the time about people getting out of tickets by taking them to court. I honestly can't believe what I hear after what I've been through.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by loony888

Of course i'm up in arms, i work hard for my wage, being robbed by a high tech government sanctioned apparatus....

I would consider it a voluntary contribution, rather than robbery, you have a choice, you can drive according to the rules or you can chose not to and as a result end up making a contribution to state funds.

In the end the decision is 100% up to you as no one else has control of your vehicle while you are driving it. If it is because you are just not capable to drive correctly then it might be time for public transport anyway.

[Henryf6]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I would consider it a voluntary contribution, rather than robbery, you have a choice, you can drive according to the rules or you can chose not to and as a result end up making a contribution to state funds.

In the end the decision is 100% up to you as no one else has control of your vehicle while you are driving it. If it is because you are just not capable to drive correctly then it might be time for public transport anyway.

And in my case? Or the case where a police officer is blatantly lying? Or if my XB daily driver speedo reads like a 40 year old speedo does. I deserve to be reamed, I understand what you're saying. The problem is, road users ARE guilty. There is no presumption of innocence and it's so bad now that they need no evidence to try you on the spot. Taking these matters to court is pointless because it is IMPOSSIBLE for you to prove your innocence and the government knows it. Pay the fine and shut your mouth. That's their attitude towards us.

Voluntary contribution is funny. They shape their budget around EXPECTED revenues from speeding fines and other ludicrous and unjust fines. So they are guessing, or they have a VERY good idea how much money will come flooding through the coffers.

It's all above board I'm sure.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I would consider it a voluntary contribution, rather than robbery, you have a choice

When a law makes normal behaviour an offence (the MAJORITY of drivers speed, fact), the law is out of step with society. I was under the impression laws were there to reflect the wishes and attitudes of society?

While I acknowledge speed enforcement is supposed to be about safety, you cant honestly say that the vast majority of enforcement (<10kmh over) has ANY safety outcome, can you?

[Trump]

Now this from the Revenue State:

http://m.theage.com.au/victoria/poli...620-2oluv.html

[grandpa_spec_F6]

I think we've all been missing the point

PAY YO TAXES - sincerely, QPS

[flappist]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I would consider it a voluntary contribution, rather than robbery, you have a choice, you can drive according to the rules or you can chose not to and as a result end up making a contribution to state funds.

In the end the decision is 100% up to you as no one else has control of your vehicle while you are driving it. If it is because you are just not capable to drive correctly then it might be time for public transport anyway.

"I would consider it voluntary masochism rather than domestic violence. She has a choice. She can do whatever she is told to do or choose not to and as a result end up paying the penalty. I only hurt her because I love her and if she would just do as she is told I would not need to hit her."

For many years domestic violence was legal and condoned by the public. The "rule of thumb" was that it was legal to beat your wife with a stick provided that stick was no thicker than your thumb.

At that time there were people who thought this was wrong despite it being the law and the popular opinion within the government as it was all about control.

Eventually that law was revoked but even today there are those with the same misanthropic draconian attitude who would use punishment almost as a hobby against those who do not wish to obey what they believe are unjust restrictions.

It is unfortunate that still in the 21st century there are those who either cannot understand or just refuse to accept that "legal", "just" and "right" are not synonyms.

[csv8]

Maybe, HUD should be compulsory in all cars ??? then we can see our speed without looking down !!!!!

[flappist]

Stay on topic guys.

This thread is about QLD speed tolerances and the surrounding cultures which have nothing to do with importing or manufacturing.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Henryf6

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

So were you speeding?

All this about what the officer did, but you haven't mentioned wether you were actually speeding or not.

I find it hard to believe that he accused you of doing nearly 50% over the posted limit, unless you were in fact clearly doing more than 40.

[csv8]

[QUOTE=BENT_8;4783813]So were you speeding?

All this about what the officer did, but you haven't mentioned wether you were actually speeding or not.

I find it hard to believe that he accused you of doing nearly 50% over the posted limit, unless you were in fact clearly doing more than 40.[/QUOTE
So Superman Does Exist !! Able to Detect Speed By Eyesight!!!

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by csv8

So Superman Does Exist !! Able to Detect Speed By Eyesight!!!

So your saying if I am clearly speeding and I pass a stationary cop he cant pull me over for it.
Henryf6 hasn't told us how fast he was actually going, he could have been doing 60 for all we know.

Perhaps the cop was actually underestimating his actual speed

He could have been zooming through traffic and have been quite obvious.

But none of that would suit the story would it...

[lilmattie]

What about the tolerances for classic vehicles, since they were designed under difference ADRs?

They currently don't have to comply with current ADR laws for registration - only their original ones.

I don't believe there will be any allowances for the older cars, but I know for a fact that an old analogue speedo is near on impossible to get to the dot accurate speed reading.

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

So your saying if I am clearly speeding and I pass a stationary cop he cant pull me over for it.
Henryf6 hasn't told us how fast he was actually going, he could have been doing 60 for all we know.

Perhaps the cop was actually underestimating his actual speed

He could have been zooming through traffic and have been quite obvious.

But none of that would suit the story would it...

IT wouldn't be a speeding offence, instead it would be dangerous driving.

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by lilmattie

What about the tolerances for classic vehicles, since they were designed under difference ADRs?

They currently don't have to comply with current ADR laws for registration - only their original ones.

I don't believe there will be any allowances for the older cars, but I know for a fact that an old analogue speedo is near on impossible to get to the dot accurate speed reading.

It's impossible to get on the dot accurate speed reading, analogue or digital, GPS isn't perfect either. There is way to many variables.

[Henryf6]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

So were you speeding?

All this about what the officer did, but you haven't mentioned wether you were actually speeding or not.

I find it hard to believe that he accused you of doing nearly 50% over the posted limit, unless you were in fact clearly doing more than 40.

It was 8pm or so at night, I turned a left hand corner heading down a slight hill, put my foot down in a 4 cylinder car for approximately 3-4 seconds. I was watching the road not the speedo. Was I speeding, possibly, but nor the officer or myself knows for sure.

Here is the point - THEY NEED NO EVIDENCE TO BOOK YOU. THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVE IT!!! They can spot any car they like and write a ticket to the driver. This is wrong in my opinion.

Ring your local police station for confirmation.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Kable72

IT wouldn't be a speeding offence, instead it would be dangerous driving.

[QUOTE]Was I speeding, possibly, but nor the officer or myself knows for sure.[QUOTE/]

What would receive the higher penalty, speeding 16k's over or dangerous driving?
Perhaps he was being lenient...

[Kable72]

[QUOTE=BENT_8;4784043]

Was I speeding, possibly, but nor the officer or myself knows for sure.[QUOTE/]

What would receive the higher penalty, speeding 16k's over or dangerous driving?
Perhaps he was being lenient...

Dunno about that one

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Kable72

Dunno about that one

QLD maximum penalty- dangerous driving 1st offence- $400 fine or 6 months.
QLD maximum penalty- 13-20k's over- $220 fine

...

[Kable72]

Doesn't dangerous driving need evidence to convict as it isn't a traffic offence and instead a criminal offence?

[martinijosh]

Originally Posted by Kable72

It's impossible to get on the dot accurate speed reading, analogue or digital, GPS isn't perfect either. There is way to many variables.

Frequently polling coordinates and measuring the time taken from point to point is pretty accurate. It only really stumbles when you are travelling on steep gradients.

[chris01]

In 1985 I was in the Queensland Police and I was sent to the Traffic Branch in Brisbane. I was also forced to complete a Radar course that I wasn't interested in doing but I passed and became a radar operator. The roadside speed radars and hand held radars were said to be accurate to plus/minus 1 km/h. Even so when we set up the radar units we generally took speeds of 15 km/h above the speed limit, eg; in a 60 km/h zone we did not book anyone unless they hit 75 km/h. Occasionally the Sergeant would tell me to take a few 74's if it was very quite, but that was it. In the 2 years I was at the Traffic Branch I never booked anyone for less than 14 km/h over the speed limit. In complaint areas some were booked for 11 km/h over the limit so there was no real direction over "speed tolerances" as such.

When I left the job in 2003 they were doing 10 + 1 on speed cameras (meaning at 71 or over in a 60 zone you would get a ticket) I'll see if I can find out what the new "tolerances" are. I suspect it would be around 4 - 5 km/h.