Speeding Fine - to High Beam or Not?

lakes_8 on 26/08/2019 - 21:57
Last edited 27/08/2019 - 08:38 by 1 other user

Sunday night (approx. 10pm) driving through a 40km/h shopping strip main road which is slightly downhill. Notice a highway patrol parked on the side of the road on my side looking for speeding cars coming the opposite way (uphill). Saw a P-plater turn the corner and knew from the instant I saw them they would not be driving 40km/h, uphill on a Sunday night.

Look into my rear view mirror and the sirens are on. Clearly revenue raising given the time of day and the place they were trying to catch people.

Should I have high-beamed to let the driver know there was a cop there? Do you usually alert other drivers?

Automotive

Comments

            • nakahanap on 31/08/2019 - 19:39

              @whooah1979: The fine, I get….to a point..

              However, speedometer makers in new cars have a 5% margin of error. Older vehicles, the margins are higher. That’s before you factor in tyre pressure which can fluctuate. Yes, you can check but that requires you to drive on certain routes, which you may or may not do.

              I find the 3% or 3km margin an issue.

              I’d rather police spent their time pulling over the unsafe drivers and those who are obviously speeding. Less revenue involved but hopefully with a bigger impact on road safety.

    • Forleix on 27/08/2019 - 18:17

      Reactive vs proactive.

      It's fascinating to see people argue against this in any way.
      Back state-side, you can purchase a firearm with very minimal training and from dodgy shops. This would be the equivalent of letting someone recklessly shoot their firearm in their backyard (assuming it ain't a ranch or such), and doing nothing about it. As a neighbour I'd be telling them to stop it before someone gets hurt rather than wait for someone few houses down to report gunfire to 911 and wait for police to arrive.

      By that time, it's too late. Bullets have flown miles into god-knows-where.

      • whooah1979 on 27/08/2019 - 18:26

        someone recklessly shoot their firearm
        As a neighbour I'd be telling them to stop it

        I would call 000 and have them deal with it.

        • Forleix on 27/08/2019 - 18:36

          I suppose that is a normal reaction if you weren't friendly or trusting with your neighbors. My analogy still stands however. Better to be proactive than reactive and deal with a fatality

          • whooah1979 on 27/08/2019 - 18:41
            +1

            @Forleix: Calling 000 is being proactive. The police will seize all the firearms and arrest your neighbour.

            Motorists on the other side of the road can’t all be your neighbours.

        • Ughhh on 27/08/2019 - 18:42
          +1

          Calling 000 would still be proactive imo, because you're doing something to prevent X risk from happening, assuming you mean calling prior to someone getting shot. But it seems people think cops should only be called/present once someone is shot.

    • Eeples on 28/08/2019 - 20:32

      It is revenue raising because cops ought to be doing something else.
      eg. investigating bigger crimes

      Not waiting and hassling community members for minor infringements.

      • whooah1979 on 28/08/2019 - 20:49
        +1

        HWP doesn’t investigate crimes. Their job is to police traffic and other things.

        • Harold Halfprice on 28/08/2019 - 21:16

          And yet they won't even come down to the scene of a collision if no one is injured, and the accident isn't a traffic hazard.

          Apparently someone failing to give way and causing a collision is a civil dispute and it has nothing to do with them - but fining someone $207 for going 3km/h over? Well, that's called "saving lives"

          • whooah1979 on 28/08/2019 - 21:20

            @Harold Halfprice:

            they won't even come down to the scene of a collision if no one is injured,

            What are they supposed to do if they did attend?

            • Harold Halfprice on 28/08/2019 - 21:26

              @whooah1979: Assess the situation and determine what caused the collision, and issue any infringements if rules were found to be broken?

              If I throw a brick through the window of your house, you'd expect the police to come - regardless if anyone was injured or not, wouldn't you?

              • whooah1979 on 28/08/2019 - 21:29

                @Harold Halfprice:

                Assess the situation and determine what caused the collision

                What?

                That is the insurer’s job.

                • Harold Halfprice on 28/08/2019 - 21:41

                  @whooah1979:

                  Assess the situation and determine what caused the collision, and issue any infringements if rules were found to be broken?

                  Why quote half a sentence?

                  You asked what are they supposed to do. You have your answer. Assess what happened - and do their (profanity) job.

                  They can check the vehicles involved for roadworthiness. They can check to ensure the drivers weren't under the influence. They can check if the drivers were licensed. They can assess whether speed was a contributing factor to the accident. None of these things can be performed by the insurer. You're acting like there's nothing for a highway patrol officer to do at the scene of an collision.

                  Again, if a brick was thrown through the window of your house, would you not expect the police to show up? Your insurer are the ones who will pay for the damages so I guess you believe there's nothing for a police officer to do?

    • This Guy on 30/08/2019 - 13:44

      Wouldn't it be more proactive to terminate the life of any speeder? After all, they may hit and kill someone.

  • spackbace on 26/08/2019 - 22:40
    +10

    Isn't it the Aussie way to flash, and then a wave to acknowledge it?

    So the cop pulls you over for a flash of the high beams? It's not difficult to say you accidentally triggered the stalk to do it.

    • brad1-8tsi on 27/08/2019 - 08:18
      +13

      And then the police officer says "So you aren't in full control of your vehicle? The fine is $$$ for that." I've had it done to me. Everything i said, he added a new fine to the list. It's one of their methods of intimidation.

  • fantombloo on 26/08/2019 - 23:22
    +3

    I flash oncoming speeders even if there is no cop ahead just to slow them down - not everyone, only those I consider are going way too fast for the conditions, and p-platers.

    • Milkywayss on 28/08/2019 - 18:10

      This really seems like the most advantageous way of doing it

    • This Guy on 30/08/2019 - 13:45

      Wait until you get flashed back with a light bar. You will love that.

  • whooah1979 on 27/08/2019 - 00:37
    +3

    High Beam or Not?

    We used to back in the day, but not anymore.

    Motorists that speed will continue to do so until they learn the hard way.

    • brendanm on 27/08/2019 - 11:20
      +9

      The hard line speed enforcement is doing wonders for the road toll rolleyes. People get there licence without understanding basic road rules, people on overseas licensed who can barely stay on a straight line can drive on our roads. Speed limits are so low on highways that people fall asleep due to fatigue.

      There are far, far more problems.

      • HighAndDry on 27/08/2019 - 12:47
        +8

        Yeah. The speed limit is a dumb, lowest common denominator and lazy way of improving road safety. It works, but it works less efficiently than basically any other method we could be using like greater driver education, mandatory defensive driving lessons, etc.

        • brendanm on 27/08/2019 - 16:55
          +6

          Correct, it's the Australian way. Fast and easy. Don't worry about actually teaching people correctly.

          Bugger got the wrong "their" in my post above and now I can't edit it :(

          • bobs burgers on 28/08/2019 - 21:02

            @brendanm: Please stop all of you.
            I'm probably about to run out of up votes

    • macrocephalic on 28/08/2019 - 00:59

      So what has changed since 'back in the day' except you?

      • whooah1979 on 28/08/2019 - 06:51

        We drive more and enjoy better roads.

  • trustnoone on 27/08/2019 - 07:49
    +2

    Interestingly, theres a think on NMRA that shows that its not specifically illegal (at least for NSW) but you can get in trouble for other areas (like chance for dazing someone).

    https://www.mynrma.com.au/cars-and-driving/driver-training-a…

    If its in the city though I probably wouldn't have done anything, I mostly only see stuff like this on the country road (to warn for kangaroos and speed camera traps).

  • pegaxs on 27/08/2019 - 08:01
    -2

    CLeArLy ReVeNuE rAiSiNg…

    Or, you know, doing their job.

    That P plater comes through your kids school zone at 60 and wipes out your kid, is it still "ReVeNuE rAiSiNg??"

    Do you really want an arsehole driver avoiding what they most probably deserve?

    • [Deactivated] on 27/08/2019 - 14:05
      +17

      I am really happy for police to be sitting in areas where speeding is dangerous, such as school zones where people speeding in those areas are a danger. Not so happy for them to be sitting on the small section of downward slope on 3 lane roads catching people that didnt realise they temporarily broke the speed limit by 5-8 km/h and are just driving with the flow of the traffic, which is actually safer.

      • bmerigan on 27/08/2019 - 16:20

        Exactly

      • lsk on 27/08/2019 - 17:20
        -1

        Police very rarely enforce anything less than 10 km/h. Giving a 5 km/h ticket would be super rare (i've never seen it done)

        • bmerigan on 27/08/2019 - 20:32
          +2

          Cameras do. The only point lost on my license is for 68 in a 60. 200m after turning off a highway, at night.

        • [Deactivated] on 28/08/2019 - 11:37
          +1

          Victoria says hi.
          Quite common for police to fine people 3km/h over the speed limit.

          They also camp outside major events and fine people for even a couple of km/h over the speed limit.

    • dogboy on 27/08/2019 - 14:46
      +4

      Wow, brainwashed much?!

      • pegaxs on 27/08/2019 - 15:04
        -1

        Wow, conspiracy theory much?!

      • HighAndDry on 27/08/2019 - 17:22
        +3

        People can have different opinions, even opinions agreeing with government, without being brainwashed.

    • Ahbal on 28/08/2019 - 09:43
      -1

      uhuh except i rarely see them camped outside of school zones. In fact, there a 6+ schools in my suburb, never see a single cop watching peoples speed during those school zone periods.

      So yes, revenue raising.

      • pegaxs on 28/08/2019 - 13:39

        I don't think you get how "rEvEnUe rAiSiNG" works.

        Traffic fines are "optional". Stamp duty, council rates, taxes, etc. on the other hand, are not.

        One is a fine/punishment for breaking road rules. The other is used to gather revenue.

        Traffic fines by their nature are not "rEvEnUe rAiSiNG", because they are totally optional.

        So, I laugh every time I hear all you parrots squawk and screech every time a thread gets posted that mentions traffic infringements.

        *BWARK* "rEvEnUe rAiSiNG" *BWARK*

    • This Guy on 30/08/2019 - 14:00
      -1

      WoN't SoMeBoDy ThInK oF tHe ChIlDrEn???

      No one I went to school with (pre school zones) died in a school zone. They died in side roads. They died on main roads.

      Technologies that have reduced these deaths include better brakes and tyres, pedestrian impact zones and anti intrusion bars (to stop cars wrapping around poles at legal speeds). Not school zones.

      The local trend in juvenile road death seems to be from collisions at more than double the posted speed limit. Again, not in school zones.

      Some toddlers can't be trusted around roads. These are the ones dying. School zones have always been a political tool. Remember, schools were getting digital signboards before flashing lights. School zones do not always align with school hours (I know schools which finish before the school zone come into effect). And school zone flashing lights took over a decade to roll out.

      • whooah1979 on 30/08/2019 - 14:05
        +1

        No one I went to school with (pre school zones) died in a school zone.

        We spend a lot of time on Sydney roads . Once in while we drive pass a school road crossing with flowers and ribbons taped to the pedestrian sign post.

        • This Guy on 30/08/2019 - 14:54

          Once in while

          This link focuses on driveway deaths, but gives other, valuable incites:

          Between 2001 and 2010, 66 kids between 0-14 died as pedestrians around the home (inside fence line).

          60 were between 0-4 years old. 6 were between 5-14 years old.

          Between mid 2002 and 2010, 43 kids were seriously injured requiring land transport around schools (9 were 0-4, 34 were 0-14 years old).

          42 out of 113 (32%) 5-14 year olds who died in this period died between 2 and 4pm, BUT only 8 died in 40kmph zones (any time of the day).

          So 8 or less school age children died as a pedestrian around Australian schools over a ten year period.

          Looking back at news reports, many deaths were due to improper parking and manuveruing, not speeding.

          From memory, schools zones were introduced in the early 00's, so this period is mostly covered by school zones.

          Once in while

          • whooah1979 on 30/08/2019 - 15:55
            +1

            @This Guy: https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/the-school-zones-barely-…

            There have been 15 children seriously injured in active school zones between December 2014 and 2017.

            https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/school-zones-thre…

            AT least one child will be hit by a car in a school zone today, according to frightening statistics revealed by the NSW Ambulance Service.
            "Every first day of term there is a child hit. It happens every year," a NSW Ambulance spokesman said.

            So 8 or less school age children died as a pedestrian around Australian schools over a ten year period.

            We should strive to make this 0 fatalities and 0 serious injuries over the next ten years. What is so important that requires a motorist to speed in a school zone?

            • nakahanap on 04/09/2019 - 20:30

              @whooah1979: As a motorist, my biggest complaint when driving in school zones is the choices of parents, who are modelling appalling behaviour in terms of how to cross a road or even get into a car safely.

              Next is some of the parents driving and attitude to safe driving. It seems some car models are more favoured by these types of drivers, too.

              Road safety isn’t one-sided.

      • pegaxs on 30/08/2019 - 14:32

        No oNe I wEnt tO sChOoL WiTh DiEd iN A sChOoL ZoNe.

        If only there was a logical fallacy that could be applied to saying things like: "Well, X didn't happen when I was younger, so X doesn't happen now".

        Well, when my grandfather was younger, cars didn't have seat belts and he didn't die. Ergo, seat belts are a waste of time…

        And people are all too quick to play the outraged "rEvEnUe rAiSiNG" card… right up until someone breaking the road rules affects them. Then it's straight to OzBargain with a heap of MSPaint pictures and a bleeding heart story. Apparently traffic fines aren't "rEvEnUe rAiSiNG" then. That's when it becomes "justice".

        • This Guy on 30/08/2019 - 15:05

          If only there was a logical fallacy

          If only I checked statistics before rattling off more relatable anecdotal evidence to make a more convincing argument. If you are going to interject shouting 'LOGICAL FALLACY' maybe learn the fundamentals, like arguing against your opponent's best argument (like I can talk).

          Of 113 deaths of school age pedestrian between 2001 and 2010, 8 were in 40kmph zones.

          Meaning 7% or less of school age pedestrian deaths occurred in school zones.

          So, I repeat,

          WoN't SoMeBoDy ThInK oF tHe ChIlDrEn???

          • pegaxs on 30/08/2019 - 16:24

            @This Guy:

            If only I checked statistics before rattling off more relatable anecdotal evidence

            Well, yes, if only you did quote facts instead of producing your own anecdotal observations and passing them off as fact.

            Anyway, your PDF of data is virtual garbage. It does not take into account the statistics prior to the introduction of school zones (ie: prior to 2001) and if anything it reinforces the fact that slowing cars down to 40km/h in these zones must have some appreciable affect on fatalities, considering that the amount of kids killed in the 50 to 60km/h bracket is so high and in the 40km/h and under bracket, is a fraction of that.

            And please, point me to where I "interjected shouting 'LOGICAL FALLACY'." (And then you go on to make it all ad hominem.)

            Here is interesting read, because you like to fact check your data before you regurgitate it…

            Casualty Reductions in NSW Associated with the 40km/h School Zone Initiative (The first paragraph under "Methods" is particularly interesting…)

            And a question. How many dead kids in school zones is "acceptable" to you?

            So, with the information you have given, that almost no kids get killed in 40km/h zones, I repeat:

            That P plater comes through your kids school zone at 60 and wipes out your kid, is it still "ReVeNuE rAiSiNg??"

            *BwAaAaArK* iT's aLL JuSt ReVeNuE rAiSiNg *BwAaAaArK*

            • This Guy on 01/09/2019 - 00:34

              @pegaxs: Ignoring most of your reply because it is one, big argumentum ad hominem. Your meat:

              almost no kids get killed in 40km/h zones

              Yet people still speed in school zones. danadanadana

              WoN't SoMeBoDy ThInK oF tHe ChIlDrEn???

              • pegaxs on 01/09/2019 - 08:57

                @This Guy: Saying "I'm ignoring most of your reply" and having no valid counter point is usually a the point where people cant think of anything better to say, so their whole side of the debate devolves into "nO iM nOt. YoU ArE!!1!11!1!!" and off topic memes.

                No oNe I wEnt tO sChOoL WiTh DiEd iN A sChOoL ZoNe.

                And yet people continue to quote bad data.

                *BwAaAaArK* iT's aLL JuSt ReVeNuE rAiSiNg *BwAaAaArK*

  • Austaurean on 27/08/2019 - 08:35
    +1

    while people do speed on purpose, there are instances that speed creeping happens, or sometimes a fairly diligent driver goes over and recorrects to the limit, but sometimes and with Murphy in the mix, there will be a radar trap right at the moment you do have a speed fluctuation.
    Even the law makers and enforcers are susceptible to either speeding on purpose or just plain speed fluctuation without meaning to.
    Its just whether or not you breach their speed variation from the posted limit as to whether or not you get a ticket.

    Hopefully it is set high enough that people doing the right thing don't get penalised for an 'inadvertent speed creep/variation'
    rather than a purposeful (eg) 10k over speed limit.

    • orangetrain on 27/08/2019 - 08:52

      It is illegal to do 1km over speed limit.

    • whooah1979 on 27/08/2019 - 09:06
      -4

      If a motorist can't pay attention to their speed then they're not paying attention to their surroundings.

      • brendanm on 27/08/2019 - 11:22
        +20

        By definition, if they are paying attention to their speed, they are not paying attention to their surroundings, as they are instead staring at a speedometer.

        • HighAndDry on 27/08/2019 - 12:49
          +1

          It's really both though - part of driving is being able to multi-task safely, whether it be looking at your speedometer or checking your mirrors/blindspot, etc, not to mention being able to do stuff everyone does while in the car like fiddle with the stereo, air-con, wipers, so on and so forth.

          • brendanm on 27/08/2019 - 13:07
            +3

            @HighAndDry: It takes half a second for your speed to creep over the limit by 1kmh. Go down a slight hill, 1kmh over. It's just a bit ridiculous now. They only dropped the speed variation allowance as they weren't getting enough people for speeding anymore.

            • HighAndDry on 27/08/2019 - 13:13
              +1

              @brendanm: No I agree, speed cameras (fixed or mobile) at the bottom of hills are evil and only there for revenue raising. Just that a decent driver should be able to keep an eye on their speed and surroundings too.

              Honestly I'm terrible (or great?) at this - eye on speed, eye on road, eye on potential speed cameras, and I take into account my speedo's margin-of-error too.

              But then, I also drive to the conditions and situation and as defensively as possible.

              • brendanm on 27/08/2019 - 16:42
                +1

                @HighAndDry:

                drive to conditions

                This is what most people fail at. Speed limit is 60, so 60 will be fine even in a snow storm.

                Sticking to an approximate speed is quite easy, you can feel the car accelerate or decelerate, however the margin for error is simply too small nowadays. I generally drive around on cruise control everywhere, however this is obviously far from perfect as well.

                I've never even been involved in a car accident. My wife has been in 4 not at fault accidents, none of them have involved speed, all were inattention, and one was just an (profanity) with no understanding of road rules.

                It's just extremely frustrating seeing everyone still fixated on speed purely because it's easy to police, and easy to make money from. As tshow states further up, people who cause accidents aren't even charged with anything anymore. Police simply don't want to come, or if they happen to see it, do nothing.

        • khomeini on 28/08/2019 - 10:41

          If this isn't a prime place to advertise a HUD, I don't what is.

          For those who cannot concentrate on the road & their speed, this (or something similar) is ideal:
          https://www.kogan.com/au/buy/obdii-car-head-display/

          Most newer cars may have a HUD but for those that don't, these are great (I got mine from eBay a while ago so I'm not affiliated with the above product/store).

          I brought one for my wife as she drives more than 100k pa and she finds it very useful without having to take her eyes off the road.

          Once the cops pulled her over and one was making comments like "the reflector makes it hard to see the driver" whilst the other was saying "cool". She was let go as there was nothing wrong with it.

          As to the above comment, I'd warrant that most drivers are guilty of going at least 1km above the limit everytime they drive. If they don't they're either 80 or pedantic (I'd be more scared of them braking suddenly than someone who drives "normally" by a few kms).

          Disclaimer: I flash my lights to warn oncoming drivers.

  • EightImmortals on 27/08/2019 - 08:56
    +23

    Alerting fellow citizens to the presence of tax collectors is the Aussie thing to do. The only caveat is to make sure you are out of view of the cops when you do it as they can fine you for doing that too. Caveat number two, if I see someone driving dangerously fast I wouldn't alert them but for the average punter safely doing a few K's over the limit, if I can save them a few hundred dollars then I will do so. And I appreciate when someone has the integrity to do the same for me.

  • Bad Company on 27/08/2019 - 09:43
    +2

    OP, unless you're in Victoria where going 2 km/h over the limit can get you in trouble, you shouldn't be sympathetic towards speeding drivers. They chose to break rules first. Ok the cops may be doing a bit of revenue raising manoeuvre but as yourself has demonstrated, it is possible to avoid getting a fine.

  • Euphemistic on 27/08/2019 - 09:52
    +1

    Only time I warn incoming traffic is if there is a hazard ahead, like a crash, broken down car or on a recent country trip hundreds of cows either side of the road.

    I have been caught a few times and fined and learned my lesson. Time for others to learn theirs too.

  • [Deactivated] on 27/08/2019 - 12:00

    Victoria's road death toll so far is 190 this year, compared to 131 in 2018.

    https://www.9news.com.au/national/woman-dies-reversing-car-f…

    • bmerigan on 27/08/2019 - 16:22
      +7

      Clearly need more cameras right? And best we don't look at the actual statistics. Let's just say it's due to speed.

      • brendanm on 27/08/2019 - 16:44

        This is the funny thing. If someone blows .2, absolutely pass out drunk, and has a crash, and was going 61kmh in a 60 zone, they class this as a speeding related crash.

        • bobs burgers on 28/08/2019 - 21:09

          This grinds my teeth a lot.
          I bet a lot of people have no clue that this is exactly how it is.

          What a bloody riot.

    • Buyme on 27/08/2019 - 21:05

      Where’s our statistician?!

      • khomeini on 28/08/2019 - 10:44

        Currently working on a MS paint diagram to highlight the correlation or causation. They'll be along shortly…

  • Godric on 27/08/2019 - 13:02
    +3

    Nope, I do the limit so should they

  • Porker on 27/08/2019 - 13:25
    -2

    Feel that police always get a bad spraying for doing their job - ".. revenue raising..". Plus speed limit applies when you're going up or down a a hill - there's no special exemption because you either have to push the accelerator harder or tap/ride the brakes.

    Does OP have any other suggestions on how to get the message to motorists that they shouldn't speed? Or the message that speeding has consequences, either to the motorists (for example, fines) or to the people that are impacted by speed-related vehicle crashes?

    Again, too easy to pick on police as the bad guys when in all likelihood they'd also be the ones we're calling if there was a threat to life.

    • dogboy on 27/08/2019 - 14:46
      +1

      You have obviously never heard of the term 'common sense'. When laws ignore this, then they are wrong.

      • Porker on 27/08/2019 - 15:06
        +1

        Care to elaborate on how you see common sense playing a part with the ability to drive at the speed limit?

        • dogboy on 27/08/2019 - 16:11
          +2

          People spending all their time constanty watching the speedo to stay exactly under the speed limit are more dangerous than people who go a couple of ks over and stay focused on the road. As mentioned by many people on this thread, it is pi$$ poor drivers that cause accidents, rarely things like speed (unless you are going crazy speeds of course). Focusing police efforts on fining people for this has very little real impact on their driving behaviour. More cops on the road monitoring drivers or providing warning of speeding cameras (whether there are or not) are lot better deterrents than a fine if what you are interested in is saving lives and not revenue raising.

          • Porker on 27/08/2019 - 16:47
            +1

            @dogboy: Yes, agree that education and awareness (that is, self-managing) has the ability to have greater influence on safer driving, and constantly watching the speedo can be a distraction in itself.

            Irrespective of what we think should or shouldn't happen, vehicle speeding is still enforced by the police force. They will determine one's compliance with respect to the road rules.

            I don't see how this relates to my ability to understand 'common sense' - which, I believe, is going to be subjective and based on each individual's motivation and experiences.

            • dogboy on 28/08/2019 - 15:56
              +1

              @Porker: Fair enough. May have been a bit hasty with the common sense line. Sorry mate

          • Miss B on 28/08/2019 - 20:11

            @dogboy: People can sit under the speed limit, it's a limit not an exact speed you must follow. Do people really not understand that they can do 58k in a 60k zone? Then if they accidentally speed up 2k they're still good, even 4k would be fine in Vic because they take off 3. That's not even taking into account speedos being up to 10% out.

            • bobs burgers on 28/08/2019 - 21:13

              @Miss B: Because the speed limit is much lower then it could be is why people want to drive on or above the limit.

              If you have any situational awareness and drive to the conditions yes you can drive slower then the posted limit of course, if necessary.

              Otherwise if everything is fine why on earth would you drive slower

              • Miss B on 28/08/2019 - 21:22

                @bobs burgers: I'm only talking about these people who aren't able to stick to a safe and legal speed at the same time as watching their surroundings. Everyone else is fine and has 2k+ leeway where they won't be fined. I keep hearing about these dangerous people who constantly stare at their speedos instead of watching the road. Obviously the simple solution is for them to travel as much under the speed limit as they need to to compensate for their reduced skill.

    • [Deactivated] on 27/08/2019 - 16:54
      +2

      Again, too easy to pick on police as the bad guys when in all likelihood they'd also be the ones we're calling if there was a threat to life.

      1. I think most of us have an issue with the enforcement policies, not the individual enforcers.

      2. They'd be the ones to call because the law has determined that it is an overall good for civilians to be unarmed and practically helpless so that law enforcement has an easier/safer time enforcing the law. In exchange, they have an obligation to provide safety in lieu of our ability to defend ourselves. Police aren't doing us any favours, keeping civilians safe is the bare minimum they are legally required to do.

  • lltravel on 27/08/2019 - 13:36
    +12

    Everyone here is a hero until they get a fine

    OP you should have alerted him

    It's clearly a bait. They are trapping people coming downhill.

    I don't see how going a few km over is going to hurt anyone. I can go faster on my electric scooter esp at 40kmph

    Speeding isn't the main cause of accidents. People have been brainwashed by the media.

    • Porker on 27/08/2019 - 13:56
      +5

      The whole campaign of 'wiping of 5km/h' does make a difference to the severity of vehicle-pedestrian crashes. I work in this industry from both research and fatality investigation perspectives (I'm not a police officer)

      I agree that notifying other motorists on the presence of police is fine, I disagree that 'a few km over' is okay without (you) understanding the situation OP is describing.

      The extra little bit of speed can be an issue depending on the road environment. Eg. Doing 85km/h in an designated 80km/h but designed for 100km/h is probably okay (eg. open area, wide lanes, no on-street parking, non-populated area). Doing 55km/h in a designated 50km/h in a populated area can be the difference between death vs injury in the event of a vehicle-pedestrian crash.

      EDIT: I see you now included the comment 'Speeding isn't the main cause of accidents. People have been brainwashed by the media'. You're right, speeding alone is generally not the main cause, but it does affect driver reaction times, increases severity of crashes etc which affects the chances of surviving crashes.

      I also acknowledge that people have different confidence levels of driving and some can confidently drive at higher speeds. However, that's hard to gauge from an enforcement perspective such that we're all lumped into 'speeding' or 'not speeding'.

  • Herbse on 27/08/2019 - 14:04
    +14

    Judging by the comments here. It seems decades of advertising telling them that "speed kills" has conditioned them into believing it.

    Speed is rarely the only factor in a fatal crash, it's almost always only one factor with others like driver error, distractions etc being the major reason for the crash. But it's impossible to police those reasons so they focus on speed and make good coin on it.

    This fear of speed has created drivers who believe that if "speed kills", then driving under the speed limit is safer, so they're afraid to drive at the same speed as other people. And because they're under the limit, they have a false sense of safety and fail to pay attention to what's happening around them. And these people are the ones who cause crashes.

    Don't believe me? Watch Dashcam owners of Australia videos and count the number of crashes caused by speeding and compare it to the number caused by idiots not paying attention to what they're bloody doing.

    • Porker on 27/08/2019 - 14:21

      Yup, agree with this too - however, the 'wipe of 5' was not focused at reducing the number of crashes, but reducing the severity of crashes when they occur.

    • [Deactivated] on 27/08/2019 - 14:42
      +2

      It's easy and there are many cases to issue speeding fines - ie. Define a limit, fine everyone that goes above that limit. If there are too few to fine, lower the limit and start again.

      If we increased the difficulty or the standard to which one must be able to operate a motor vehicle, that would definitely contribute to road safety but it would be unpopular and harder to financially penalize.

      Speeding fines are the blow off class of traffic infringements. Easy pass for practically zero effort.

    • funnysht on 27/08/2019 - 15:08

      Thats idiotic
      Speeding issues occur on long strectches of road where there are usually mininal other cars around. Thus less dash cam evidence.

      Howeveri think both are issues

  • Jackkkkkk on 27/08/2019 - 14:24
    +1

    Flashing your lights to warn other drivers of speed cameras
    While this may seem like a helpful way of protecting your fellow drivers, it can lead to a fine of up to $110 and attract 1 demerit point in NSW as flashing your lights can be misconstrued as an attempt to dazzle another road user. While warning others isn’t strictly prohibited, dipping your lights is restricted.

    NSW: $110 fine
    Western Australia: $100 fine
    Queensland: $50 fine and one demerit point

    link to other fines

    • Sage on 27/08/2019 - 19:10
      +2

      so in VIC it's free rein? cool.

    • cwongtech on 28/08/2019 - 00:41

      "While warning others isn’t strictly prohibited, dipping your lights is restricted."

      What about toggling fog lights on/off?

      Or toggling your main night lights from primary to DRLs?
      No chance of dazzling oncoming traffic?

      Surely the dimly lit fog lights can't be seen from behind?

  • dogboy on 27/08/2019 - 14:44
    +3

    Who do people feel the need to high beam? Just turn your lights from normal to half setting and back to normal. Can't get done for using high beams within 150m of oncoming vehicle then.

    • bmerigan on 27/08/2019 - 16:26
      +1

      Good tip, though people may not recognise the unflash message

    • TEER3X on 28/08/2019 - 13:41

      Yep, that's what I do

  • funnysht on 27/08/2019 - 15:06

    I dont- ppl who speed are jerks and they deserve to be fined.

    Think about it if they dont learn their lesson then they go on to harn innocent pedestrian. -it's on your conscious.

    • dogboy on 27/08/2019 - 16:07
      -2

      Seriously? That is funnysht!

    • cwongtech on 28/08/2019 - 00:47
      +1

      "Think about it if they dont learn their lesson then they go on to harn innocent pedestrian. -it's on your conscious."

      So the death caused by this in the Sydney CBD would have been less than 40km/h

      It's about drivers being distracted

      • funnysht on 28/08/2019 - 10:32
        +1

        That's because it is in the city. Look at the rural and regional ones mate.

        Ppl who down vote this think abt this:
        They full know that the limit is 40 but they dont care and drive at say 50 with kids in the back and your kids going to school not giving a fuvk because they want to get to saloon or pub quickly.

        I rather give my money to the cops to catch these idiots who dont give a damn.
        To those who say going downhill… Well of you're really not paying attention to notice that…

  • Bid Sniper on 27/08/2019 - 15:08

    I flash only for mobile speed cameras, they are operated by banks so F em.

    NSW highway patrol only pull over people that are really stupid, low range speeding they dont bother with most of the time, so if you're not an idiot they will leave you alone.

  • happirt on 27/08/2019 - 15:23
    +3

    this is the golden rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

    treat others as you want to be treated

    carry on.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join