My theory for speed cameras; Part 1!

[XDV800]

Speed Cameras. 2 issues i have with them.
Some of you feel enraged just at the thought of the bloody things sending you a postcard in the mail, i know i do.

Theres always a discussion about these things and how they are simply a way for the states to scavenge as many dollars from us as possible. Families, low income earners, volunteers. Some people could be left on their knees if their licence is taken away from them. It really is an attack on our rights as citizens to live in a democracy, where innocent until proven guilty is supposedly an ideology upheld by the court systems.
So how did the courts and the lawmakers and legislators in whatever superpower country that 1st introduced these devices, decide that it was ok to fine and infringe penalties upon people, for basically committing no crime, no harm to any fellow human being, or property, but simply operating a motor vehicle at a speed at which it has been designed to achieve, and then happily sold to the public to use in any way they see fit.

Lets face it, being ticketed for speeding is just an ASSUMPTION that an incident may occur. How can we justify this seriously?

(I am creating a Part 2 to this to highlight my thoughts on my 2nd issue, and a new approach on camera locations and who controls them. Just didn't want to have all this in one thread)

[P6LTD351]

Not this again.

My theory for speed cameras: Don't speed and you have nothing to worry about. And bringing up times where there have been errors is not a counter argument. If you feel that you have been wrongly fined, take it further. The chances of it occurring is minimal. I'd like to see the track record of previous fines received from those that whinge about them. What relevance does talking about low income families and volunteers have? I would have thought they can't afford to speed? Speeding is no harm to any human being? I suppose drinking and driving is ok too?

[Jim Goose]

Er... I think you need a better arguement if you want to win a debate about speed cameras? (and no I am not a supporter of them)

Some people could be left on their knees if their licence is taken away from them. It really is an attack on our rights as citizens to live in a democracy, where innocent until proven guilty is supposedly an ideology upheld by the court systems.

The camera takes a photo of you when you break the speed limit. A policeman pulls you over when they catch you on radar/lazer..... There is no difference there. You can argue about calibration, how the device is used etc etc... The device proves you broke the speed limit (and yes i know you can argue again about accuracy etc).

So how did the courts and the lawmakers and legislators in whatever superpower country that 1st introduced these devices, decide that it was ok to fine and infringe penalties upon people, for basically committing no crime, no harm to any fellow human being, or property, but simply operating a motor vehicle at a speed at which it has been designed to achieve, and then happily sold to the public to use in any way they see fit.

What does this have to do with speed cameras?
Speed limits were set in road laws decades before people thought of speed cameras. Speed limits were set as part of the road rules.
As part of your arguement are you saying we should have no road rules?
100kmh in a school zone? No traffic lights?

Lets face it, being ticketed for speeding is just an ASSUMPTION that an incident may occur. How can we justify this seriously?

There is no assumption of anything... you broke the law and you get punished. Speed limits were set in order to try and find a balance to help traffic flow and lower the possibility of serious injury where applicable.. ie 60kmh in a built up area where there are a lot of people walking, lots of buildings etc.... it has nothing to do with speed cameras.

Your arguement seems to be totally based on the speed limit (which we have had long before cameras came along). You should be argueing about their location, the relationship between them and so-called accident statistics, how its a blatent revenue raiser.......

[P6LTD351]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Er... I think you need a better arguement if you want to win a debate about speed cameras? (and no I am not a supporter of them)



The camera takes a photo of you when you break the speed limit. A policeman pulls you over when they catch you on radar/lazer..... There is no difference there. You can argue about calibration, how the device is used etc etc... The device proves you broke the speed limit (and yes i know you can argue again about accuracy etc).



What does this have to do with speed cameras?
Speed limits were set in road laws decades before people thought of speed cameras. Speed limits were set as part of the road rules.
As part of your arguement are you saying we should have no road rules?
100kmh in a school zone? No traffic lights?




There is no assumption of anything... you broke the law and you get punished. Speed limits were set in order to try and find a balance to help traffic flow and lower the possibility of serious injury where applicable.. ie 60kmh in a built up area where there are a lot of people walking, lots of buildings etc.... it has nothing to do with speed cameras.

Your arguement seems to be totally based on the speed limit (which we have had long before cameras came along). You should be argueing about their location, the relationship between them and so-called accident statistics, how its a blatent revenue raiser.......

Very well said

[XDV800]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Er... I think you need a better arguement if you want to win a debate about speed cameras? (and no I am not a supporter of them)



The camera takes a photo of you when you break the speed limit. A policeman pulls you over when they catch you on radar/lazer..... There is no difference there. You can argue about calibration, how the device is used etc etc... The device proves you broke the speed limit (and yes i know you can argue again about accuracy etc).



What does this have to do with speed cameras?
Speed limits were set in road laws decades before people thought of speed cameras. Speed limits were set as part of the road rules.
As part of your arguement are you saying we should have no road rules?
100kmh in a school zone? No traffic lights?




There is no assumption of anything... you broke the law and you get punished. Speed limits were set in order to try and find a balance to help traffic flow and lower the possibility of serious injury where applicable.. ie 60kmh in a built up area where there are a lot of people walking, lots of buildings etc.... it has nothing to do with speed cameras.

Your arguement seems to be totally based on the speed limit (which we have had long before cameras came along). You should be argueing about their location, the relationship between them and so-called accident statistics, how its a blatent revenue raiser.......

See part 2.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by eb2monty

Not this again.

My theory for speed cameras: Don't speed and you have nothing to worry about

true


another option is to open your eyes when driving. the mobile ones light up like beacons and the fixed ones . . . . well, how many times can a smart person go passed the same revenue raising camera without realising it will ping you time and time again

on a purely selfish level, i don't have a problem with them. they do not get me, and they cannot give me an unroadworthy or other driving related offence. plus i choose if wish to pay that tax or not

[XDV800]

Look feel free to close this thread moderators, I probably shouldn't have started this part of my topic, if all the replies are just going to be ear bashings by those that don't even read and try to digest and expand helpfully on the meaning of what is posted.

[zdcol71]

"It really is an attack on our rights as citizens to live in a democracy, where innocent until proven guilty is supposedly an ideology upheld by the court systems".

Firstly in relation to your topic...what a ridiculous statement, the fact that you get a picture in the mail actually should indicate to you that you are in fact guilty, and unless you were to dispute the accuracy of every camera operating in the country, and all the independent or otherwise bodies set up to administer the accuracy of these cameras,then I'm guessing this ideology you talk of is pretty well upheld by the courts.

Secondly ,don't talk about a democracy if you are going to cite it in terms of a very limited (dare I say vested) interest forum group. In a democracy there are a lot more stakeholders than motorists who actually get caught and fined for breaking the law. In the "democracy" that I live in ,the issue of being found guilty of exceeding a speed "limit" and proven to have done so does not constitute an overwhelming concern to the majority of people. It is the law, and something that most seem happy enough to accept. (before the inevitable rant comes back about being a lacky to the govco,or some other such apologist to whomever...I do understand the concept of the lowest common denominator)

[SEZ213]

I'm going to go out on a limb here...I think I actually understand what the OP is trying to say (little bit too emotive and poorly worded, just for future reference)...

The problem is there's two sides to every coin, each person feels they know what's best for them. They very rarely stop to think about what's best for others.

You may be able to do 150 in your car, but other's can't, they lack the cognitive skills to successfully achieve such speeds, and the result tends to be less than satisfactory for everyone concerned.

We don't have a democracy, and I'll wait for the earbashing that follows that comment.

I guess my biggest problem with your position is that low income earners, etc can be brought to their knees. Let's get one thing straight, they are no more important that you, me, Joe Bloggs down the road - they're treated differently, and they shouldn't be.

I guess at the end of the day, if these people lose their licence because they either refuse to follow the law, or they just don't care - that's their problem...and they really should have thought of that before.

People in this country need to start taking responsibility for their actions.

Suggesting that people should be allowed to speed can be likened to people being allowed to commit murder...there's laws that say you can't. Sure, some people speed, some people commit murder...but for the most part, the rest of us understand that we're responsible for our own lives, and what happens in it.

[XDV800]

Originally Posted by Sezzy

(little bit too emotive and poorly worded, just for future reference)...Yes you are right there, I seem to have a head cold at the moment and should have left the topic till i was more clear headed


The problem is there's two sides to every coin, each person feels they know what's best for them. They very rarely stop to think about what's best for others.

You may be able to do 150 in your car, but other's can't, they lack the cognitive skills to successfully achieve such speeds, and the result tends to be less than satisfactory for everyone concerned.

Absolutely

We don't have a democracy, and I'll wait for the earbashing that follows that comment.

I guess my biggest problem with your position is that low income earners, etc can be brought to their knees. Let's get one thing straight, they are no more important that you, me, Joe Bloggs down the road - they're treated differently, and they shouldn't be.

I guess at the end of the day, if these people lose their licence because they either refuse to follow the law, or they just don't care - that's their problem...and they really should have thought of that before.

People make mistakes also. Exceeding the posted limit for a moment or two is somehow criminal?

People in this country need to start taking responsibility for their actions.

Suggesting that people should be allowed to speed can be likened to people being allowed to commit murder...there's laws that say you can't. Sure, some people speed, some people commit murder...but for the most part, the rest of us understand that we're responsible for our own lives, and what happens in it.

Well that is just ridiculous, comparing murder to exceeding the speed limit, come on now

Look, ultimately I should have asked how can we go about enforcing the law in a different way, instead of just straight away fining people, especially on their 1st offence. The courts offer some leniency to 1st time offenders especially, for harsher crimes against peoples civil liberties.
Speeding fines are the same for all, no leniency for making a mistake for the 1st time, where there used to be some discretion given by a traffic cop back in the day. Not anymore

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by yzfr101

Look, ultimately I should have asked how can we go about enforcing the law in a different way, instead of just straight away fining people, especially on their 1st offence. The courts offer some leniency to 1st time offenders especially, for harsher crimes against peoples civil liberties.
Speeding fines are the same for all, no leniency for making a mistake for the 1st time, where there used to be some discretion given by a traffic cop back in the day. Not anymore

the problem is, speed cameras are not for road safety - they are for revenue. we pretty much all agree to that to a point

because of the revenue part, it is effectively a tax. i would much rather someone who is unaware of their surroundings on the road pay a tax instead of me. if they take away speed cameras - or put them where they will do the most good, the revenue will drop and they will sting us in another way. at least this way, we all have a choice as to whether we pay the tax or not

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by eb2monty

Not this again.

My theory for speed cameras: Don't speed and you have nothing to worry about.

I love this quote. It's usually quoted by people who don't see the bigger picture. So are you telling me that never once in your life been above the speed limit? Never? You have never looked down at your speedo & found yourself doing 90 in an 80 zone? 112 in a 100? Not once? I'm sorry but if you havent you must be a perfect driver. Possibly the only one, but I believe it's highly unlikely. I believe that everyone once in their years of driving has had a little surprise when they have looked down at the speedo and found they were above the limit. And if they say they haven't. They are lying.

The last time (& first time) I was snapped I didn't even know I was over till I saw this massive flash (it was about 7pm) followed by a loud "WTF?" looked down at my speedo to find myself doing 110 (fined for 111) in a 100km zone on the Warrego Hwy. Now before you say that it's obvious I wasn't payig attention to "driving" your wrong. I was rather focused on the three cars ahead of me that were vigorously playing a shell game of lane changing since blacksoil....

Originally Posted by eb2monty

What relevance does talking about low income families and volunteers have? I would have thought they can't afford to speed?

Now for this one. I'm not a low income earner, but I'm not middle class either. Long story short, I bought a property to make money on. & since then, my investment property has done nothing but drain me. So for the past few years I don't have alot of spare money. Barely $100 a month if I'm lucky. However, the aforementioned happy snap cost me $133 and one point. Now the one pint was ok, I had my full 12, but that 133 really hurt. So you say I can't afford to speed, your right. But look at the reason why I wasn't concertrating on the speedo...... Ain't exactly fair.....

We are bring forced to drive perfectly, When we are not perfect creatures....

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by yzfr101

Look, ultimately I should have asked how can we go about enforcing the law in a different way, instead of just straight away fining people, especially on their 1st offence. The courts offer some leniency to 1st time offenders especially, for harsher crimes against peoples civil liberties.
Speeding fines are the same for all, no leniency for making a mistake for the 1st time, where there used to be some discretion given by a traffic cop back in the day. Not anymore

The comparison was to the law, and I probably worded that wrong myself...but there are laws against murder and also laws against speeding.

I understand what you mean by it being an assumption...but unfortunately, that's the way our laws work. Lobbying is an option, but as I said earlier, there are those that lack the ability to do the speed limit that we currently have...and with everything in life these days, it's all focused towards the lowest common denominator.

I do recall something about people being able to ask for leniency in these situations, something about a clean driving licence for a certain period of time...It fails me now, but I know I've read it somewhere.

The problem is that this law makes the most money - it pays the bureaucrats, it pays (in part) for roads, parks, etc...

No-one likes speed cameras, not any real person I know anyway...but most accept that as has been previously said, it's a voluntary tax...only you can choose if you pay that tax or not...

[bingoTE50]

As a recent transgressor of the said polaroid machine , I will cop the $133 on the chin ,pay it and move on . I did have a rant on another thread rightly or wrongly.
The issue for me is , a polaroid is a snapshot in time ,what happens before or after that point is anyones guess . The undisguised cameras ( fixed) in NSW at blackspots work for my way of thinking . You know its there,you slow if speeding and pass through the problem area , ( if it is a blackspot ? ) . The hidden ones or hard to identify ones to me, only serve the purpose of catching people out. Now habitual speeders will eventually lose their licence . What about speeding intoxicated drivers ? How is it best to eradicate them of the road ?
Think about this - if you owned the Police Force as a Company . You have the choice of paying a Officer at 60 k a year , run a Highway Patrol Car ,and he has to pay for himself via fines which is your Companies income , or buy some covert speed cameras which can be placed strategically by one or two officers . A one of Cap EX to buy the cameras , depreciate them over time, and pay two salaries . Which Business model would be more successful for your Company? I'll take the cameras please . ..

[XDV800]

Originally Posted by Blue Beast II

I love this quote. It's usually quoted by people who don't see the bigger picture. So are you telling me that never once in your life been above the speed limit? Never? You have never looked down at your speedo & found yourself doing 90 in an 80 zone? 112 in a 100? Not once? I'm sorry but if you havent you must be a perfect driver. Possibly the only one, but I believe it's highly unlikely. I believe that everyone once in their years of driving has had a little surprise when they have looked down at the speedo and found they were above the limit. And if they say they haven't. They are lying.

The last time (& first time) I was snapped I didn't even know I was over till I saw this massive flash (it was about 7pm) followed by a loud "WTF?" looked down at my speedo to find myself doing 110 (fined for 111) in a 100km zone on the Warrego Hwy. Now before you say that it's obvious I wasn't payig attention to "driving" your wrong. I was rather focused on the three cars ahead of me that were vigorously playing a shell game of lane changing since blacksoil....



Now for this one. I'm not a low income earner, but I'm not middle class either. Long story short, I bought a property to make money on. & since then, my investment property has done nothing but drain me. So for the past few years I don't have alot of spare money. Barely $100 a month if I'm lucky. However, the aforementioned happy snap cost me $133 and one point. Now the one pint was ok, I had my full 12, but that 133 really hurt. So you say I can't afford to speed, your right. But look at the reason why I wasn't concertrating on the speedo...... Ain't exactly fair.....

We are bring forced to drive perfectly, When we are not perfect creatures....

[P6LTD351]

Originally Posted by Blue Beast II

I love this quote. It's usually quoted by people who don't see the bigger picture. So are you telling me that never once in your life been above the speed limit? Never? You have never looked down at your speedo & found yourself doing 90 in an 80 zone? 112 in a 100? Not once? I'm sorry but if you havent you must be a perfect driver. Possibly the only one, but I believe it's highly unlikely. I believe that everyone once in their years of driving has had a little surprise when they have looked down at the speedo and found they were above the limit. And if they say they haven't. They are lying.

The last time (& first time) I was snapped I didn't even know I was over till I saw this massive flash (it was about 7pm) followed by a loud "WTF?" looked down at my speedo to find myself doing 110 (fined for 111) in a 100km zone on the Warrego Hwy. Now before you say that it's obvious I wasn't payig attention to "driving" your wrong. I was rather focused on the three cars ahead of me that were vigorously playing a shell game of lane changing since blacksoil....



Now for this one. I'm not a low income earner, but I'm not middle class either. Long story short, I bought a property to make money on. & since then, my investment property has done nothing but drain me. So for the past few years I don't have alot of spare money. Barely $100 a month if I'm lucky. However, the aforementioned happy snap cost me $133 and one point. Now the one pint was ok, I had my full 12, but that 133 really hurt. So you say I can't afford to speed, your right. But look at the reason why I wasn't concertrating on the speedo...... Ain't exactly fair.....

We are bring forced to drive perfectly, When we are not perfect creatures....

Yes I have gone over the limit before. Luckily I have never been caught and never had a speeding fine in 17 years of driving. But if I DID get caught, I have ONLY got MYSELF to blame. That's the crux of this. Society (and I'm generalising here) always wants to blame someone else other than themselves. Are speed cameras revenue raisers? YES! But I choose not to contribute to that revenue. If I slip up and get caught: my problem.

And lastly, it's not too much to ask to stick to the speed limit. If you find that you have trouble checking the speedo, how about go a few ks slower than the limit to give you that leeway

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by eb2monty

Yes I have gone over the limit before. Luckily I have never been caught and never had a speeding fine in 17 years of driving. But if I DID get caught, I have ONLY got MYSELF to blame. That's the crux of this. Society (and I'm generalising here) always wants to blame someone else other than themselves. Are speed cameras revenue raisers? YES! But I choose not to contribute to that revenue. If I slip up and get caught: my problem.

And lastly, it's not too much to ask to stick to the speed limit. If you find that you have trouble checking the speedo, how about go a few ks slower than the limit to give you that leeway

please, no logic on this forum

Originally Posted by Blue Beast II

I love this quote. It's usually quoted by people who don't see the bigger picture. So are you telling me that never once in your life been above the speed limit? Never? You have never looked down at your speedo & found yourself doing 90 in an 80 zone? 112 in a 100? Not once? I'm sorry but if you havent you must be a perfect driver. Possibly the only one, but I believe it's highly unlikely. I believe that everyone once in their years of driving has had a little surprise when they have looked down at the speedo and found they were above the limit. And if they say they haven't. They are lying

i have sped before and no doubt i will again. i speed too much - but i see the cameras. does that mean i am aware or lucky - maybe a bit of both, but there is no way, so many people can be caught by them if they are aware of their surroundings. surroundings include speed cameras, cars, bikes, trucks, pedestrian, kids, animals, pot holes etc. if you are not aware of your surroundings, you deserve the fine. the ones i have got, i accepted. i knew the rules, but chose to ignore them or be ignorant - my fault, my penalty - end of story
but more importantly - no complaints

[P6LTD351]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

please, no logic on this forum

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by eb2monty

I'd like to see the track record of previous fines received from those that whinge about them.

I complain about speed cameras.

I have never been fined for anything.

Not everyone who complains are just complaining because 1 more slip up and they lose their license.
Some people actually have their eyes open and can see the blatant revenue raising without actually getting a fine.

[P6LTD351]

Originally Posted by Ben73

I complain about speed cameras.

I have never been fined for anything.

Not everyone who complains are just complaining because 1 more slip up and they lose their license.
Some people actually have their eyes open and can see the blatant revenue raising without actually getting a fine.

Ok, I have already admitted that it is revenue raising. Becomes null and void if you choose not to contribute to the revenue raising; and if you do, cop it on the chin. On the other hand, some people just like complaining!

[Ben73]

I don't complain very often, only about speed cameras.
If I get a speeding fine Ill pay it, I never said I wouldn't.

It seams that most people think the only people who complain about cameras are hoons that receive fines all the time. I am just pointing out that is not completely true.

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

please, no logic on this forum
i have sped before and no doubt i will again. i speed too much - but i see the cameras. does that mean i am aware or lucky - maybe a bit of both, but there is no way, so many people can be caught by them if they are aware of their surroundings. surroundings include speed cameras, cars, bikes, trucks, pedestrian, kids, animals, pot holes etc. if you are not aware of your surroundings, you deserve the fine. the ones i have got, i accepted. i knew the rules, but chose to ignore them or be ignorant - my fault, my penalty - end of story
but more importantly - no complaints

Oh I did forget to mention that mr Polaroid was hidding behind the rather high shrub there?? I can't see what I can't see. But you can never argue that point when contesting a fine, or why I was more focused on the traffic ahead....

It's not like it's a problem that I have, Like I said it's the first time I had been snapped. I always see a speed camera, I'm always looking for them, plus whatever else could jump out at me. Actually the intersection only a few hundred meters from the camera position is a bit of a black spot for people who think they can beat the traffic both across & joining the highway. So I'm on alert on it's approach. There has only been few times I have seen one, looked down and been above. it's solved with a quick roll-off of the trottle. Im generally sitting on 98 in the hunderd (i love my digital dash), But the one time I was concentrating on three cars ahead if me playing silly buggers, was the one time I was above, the one time there was a camera, & the one time is wasn't focused on peripheral. Not that I would have seen him anyway.... Nor does anyone else who goes past. Many a time since that night I gave seen a few flashes go off as cars go by, followed by brakes lights. As I approach (after double checking my speed) sure enough, he's hidden behind the bush where you can't see him until the flash goes off.

[Bent8]

Nice post OP...

Basically comes down to this...The Govt designs our roads and sets the speed limits that will meet the safety requirements of the cheapest roadworthy vehicles and the laws they introduce are there to target the 2% of the driving population who drink drive or drive in a reckless manner.

This mindset applies to everything, the laws are designed to protect the rest of us from the lowest common denominator in our society.

In turn, the Govt uses this mindset to slowly (but surely) take away our rights and freedoms with the argument they are making our roads safer, when in reality the goal is to feed off us financially and make us slaves to the system.

The term, "presumed innocent until proven guilty" is no longer true in our world...we can thank those in our population who think the Govt is their best friend for this!

It's up to us to make the change, stand up and demand this illegal revenue raising is stopped, because things will only get worse as long as we are willing to accept it.

Remember this...."before you can put your head in the sand, you first have to be on your knees!"

[zdcol71]

Originally Posted by Bent8

Nice post OP...

Basically comes down to this...The Govt designs our roads and sets the speed limits that will meet the safety requirements of the cheapest roadworthy vehicles and the laws they introduce are there to target the 2% of the driving population who drink drive or drive in a reckless manner.

This mindset applies to everything, the laws are designed to protect the rest of us from the lowest common denominator in our society.

In turn, the Govt uses this mindset to slowly (but surely) take away our rights and freedoms with the argument they are making our roads safer, when in reality the goal is to feed off us financially and make us slaves to the system.

The term, "presumed innocent until proven guilty" is no longer true in our world...we can thank those in our population who think the Govt is their best friend for this!

It's up to us to make the change, stand up and demand this illegal revenue raising is stopped, because things will only get worse as long as we are willing to accept it.

Remember this...."before you can put your head in the sand, you first have to be on your knees!"

Oh to be young again and stickin' it to the man!! OH, Pleeeease,

[irish2]

Originally Posted by Blue Beast II

We are bring forced to drive perfectly, When we are not perfect creatures....

Not really. It seems it is OK to perform illegal U-turns, drive through red lights, weave dangerously, talk on your mobile, and drive on the wrong side of the road. 10km over the limit however and you have to hand your license in.

[Angeldust]

Law is NOT a God given right

the whole speed/not speed thing is relative.

Funny that i was driving on most of the roads a few years earlier at a slightly higher speed limit, then some bunch of idiots decided that these limits need to be dropped. So now its illegtal to drive at a speed that i have been driving on the same road for years before.

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by Angeldust

Law is NOT a God given right

the whole speed/not speed thing is relative.

Funny that i was driving on most of the roads a few years earlier at a slightly higher speed limit, then some bunch of idiots decided that these limits need to be dropped. So now its illegtal to drive at a speed that i have been driving on the same road for years before.

Having a licence isn't a god given right either, many people seem to forget that.

Has the road surface changed, have they completed any roadworks in that section? Has there been a higher proportion of accidents in that area...? Do you know why they've the limit, or are you just cranky that they have without knowing why?

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by eb2monty

Not this again.

My theory for speed cameras: Don't speed and you have nothing to worry about. And bringing up times where there have been errors is not a counter argument. If you feel that you have been wrongly fined, take it further. The chances of it occurring is minimal. I'd like to see the track record of previous fines received from those that whinge about them. What relevance does talking about low income families and volunteers have? I would have thought they can't afford to speed? Speeding is no harm to any human being? I suppose drinking and driving is ok too?

I often wonder if people who say "if you think it was wrong, just fight it in court" have ever actually tried such a thing?

My own cautionary tale...
I was finishing up at the factory where I worked in Bundaberg. It was situated on a main open wide two lane road, in town, with a ver wide dirt verge either side leading from the gutter up a rise to the bitumen (it has seince been widened and bitumened all the way to the gutter).
This road, Bargara Road, is a well trafficked road, very heavy in the morning and night as people go to and from work. The police quite regularly set up speed traps near the factory and it was almost a sport for us to sit out the front having smoko and watch people getting booked. We were all quite well aware that police could be relied upon to be hiding somewhere along that road towards town, therefore even the most lead-footed of us never...and I mean never...went over the speed limit along that road...to such an extent that in 19 years of work at that factory, no one who worked there was booked along that road. Elsewhere in town, yes, but never along that road...we knew the chances of being caught there were astronomical.

I had parked my old motorbike backed into the gutter out the front of the factory, and came out to leave work...I was the last man out of the place and the only vehicle parked along maybe a couple of hundred meters either way of roadside was my bike. I could see well down the road towards town, and there were no other cars within sight, apart from some parked cars maybe 200 meters away near a shop. I hopped on and rode off towards town. The dirt meant I could only take off steadily until I reached the bitumen, then started to accelerate pretty steadily. I only got to second gear and saw a guy step out well down the road with a reflective vest and torch, and start waving at me. I didn't accelerate beyond about 40kph as I knew I would have to stop.
It was a cop, and I took off my helmet and said "Yes officer?", expecting a random breath test. He said "You were speeding back there".
Shocked, I said "Where?", and he pointed back up the road. I said I had only just pulled out of the parking area, and he said "yes I saw you". He the proceeded to show me the laser gun, which said I had been doing 72kph, 140 meters from his position.
I told him I wasn;t paying the fine, and he said that was my right.
To digress, I never saw him zero the gun, merely toss it back onto the drivers seat...I wondered how many other people had been booked for "72kph" at that spot that afternoon...
The next day I went to work and got a meter wheel and measured off the distance from my parking space to where the cop had been standing...142 meters. I briefly considered advertising my bike for sale as the fastest accelerating motorcycle in the world...standing start to 72kph in 2 meters...

I went to the police station, explained what had happened, and the policewoman behind the desk also said she wouldn't have paid it if it happened like I claimed. She was very helpful and gave me a statutory declaration form, explained what I had to do, and also gave me the address to send my claim off to. She said don't pay the fine, but to wait for a decision from on high, which could take a while.
I sent it off with a full explanation (pretty much what it says here) and included time of day, and a hand drawn map of where it had happened and all distances measured off neatly.
Three months later a letter came...the gist of which was, to be blunt, "We're right, you're wrong, pay up".

My mates at work said "Take it to court and fight it!!!". What for? To take a couple of days off work, employ a solicitor, and still be told "we're right, you're wrong, pay up...plus costs...".

The entire system is geared to discourage people from going to court and fighting a fine. Along with tax law, it's the only part of the justice system where you are presumed guilty until you can somehow prove yourself innocent.
They don't want people to fight it, by making out that the speed camera/laser gun/radar gun is absolutely, totally, 100% infallible...unlike any other scientific instrument you care to name, from a lab thermometer to a mass spectrometer to a CAT scan machine...each and every single one of them has an error margin in it, which has to be taken into account. but not speed measuring devices used by police...they are never ever ever wrong. If you told any technician to measure something accurately, he would first want to know the exact conditions the measurement would be taken under. Say to him "Don't worry about the conditions...they'll be changing from moment to moment, minute to minute, day to day...don't concern yourself about them, just give me a measurement"...you'd be laughed at and told to come back when you can guarantee controlled conditions under which to give a reasonably accurate and repeatable measurement.

My son got a speed camera fine from Rockhampton, along the main road into town near the tourist center, where the speed limit goes from 60kph to 70kph. They sit there all the time...anyone here from the Rocky region will know the spot. In the photo was a car behind my sons car, and one to the right. Which car was speeding? Police claim that they have "learned more about how radar works and know exactly which car is speeding in a photo"...but this is only because they used to give the benefit of the doubt to drivers, and if more than one car was in a picture in close proximity to each other, they would discard it. They were, basically, chucking out far too many profitable photographs so came up with the lie that thier radar...unlike every other radar emitter in the world, emits a tight vertical beam across the road and picks out one car from a bunch. Yeah...sure it does.

It's all a scam...get police back out on the roads instead of hiding in the bushes, make them pull people over and fine them when they have been proved to be speeding by being followed in a police car with a currently calibrated speedo, instead of a fallible device used in many different environments.
If you want to get real accurate, fit each car with a forward facing camera and link this to embedded GPS showing the time, date, location, and speed at time of offence. Use this for every single charge of speeding. This would give people a fighting chance to back up thier claim that they weren't speeding.

Expensive? Yes it would be...but aren't we repeatedly told "If it only saves one life it's worth it"...?

[irish2]

Originally Posted by Sezzy

Having a licence isn't a god given right either, many people seem to forget that.

Has the road surface changed, have they completed any roadworks in that section? Has there been a higher proportion of accidents in that area...? Do you know why they've the limit, or are you just cranky that they have without knowing why?

I know there was a section of road near where I lived that underwent some roadworks. It went from a two land undivided very thin road with an 80km/h speed limit, to a 4 lane divided road with emergency lane and gutters at 60km/h. It seemed so slow on such a wide road with very little traffic crawling along at 60k's.

[zdcol71]

I often wonder if people who say "if you think it was wrong, just fight it in court" have ever actually tried such a thing?
Boy, that was a long post, but to answer your question,.....yes!!!,and won!!