https://www.9news.com.au/national/nsw-speed-camera-warning-s…
Guess i will be running WAZE from the google play store full time and updating on the regular for other drivers on the road now.
Personally i feel this is just another cash grab and ultimately they want to roll out more privately owned mobile speed camera's so they can nab you anywhere at anytime without signage.
What do you all think about this? and is there anything that we can do to keep the current system how it is?
And WA
I didn’t realise any other states were welcome in WA at the moment.
If the citizens of WA had their way, no one would be 😉
Que a zillion virtue signallers who never speed and argue for extreme penalties for any crime…
I believe that's "cue". You're welcome.
Or queue, if they want to get in a line to signal their virtue…
¿Que?
I'm surprised so many people have never accidentally gone 10kmh over. Would be hilarious to see these virtue signallers get done.
Stupid law. There should be a buffer to allow reasonable speeding. It's distracting not knowing if there's a camera and constantly having to look down to check your speed, especially on a motorbike.
There's also been times riding and driving where I've had to accelerate out of danger from merging cars.
All you virtue signallers who've never done 60 in a 50 or 115 in a 110 zone, I hope you all get done.
I'm surprised so many people have never accidentally gone 10kmh over.
It happens. I've been done for 60 in a 50 zone and pulled over for 90 in an 80 zone (no action other than a "pay more attention to the road signs" warning) and a couple of others. I still say "suck it up" to those that get caught speeding though. It's not virtue signalling, it's just common courtesy to drive safely. People slip up, it's inevitable. In the pretty rare situation where they slip up within a few tens of metres of a speed camera then they get a nice reminder that financially incentivises them to pay a bit more attention to how they drive.
The mild inconvenience of not being legally able to go above the set speed limit is insignificant compared to the advantages it has to other road users.
MoeyDW2200, if you are the type of driver that complies with the speed limit every time you drive, you should have nothing to worry about.
Even through the occasional momentary slight exceedance of the speed (i.e when going downhill and you didn't brake enough), the chance of getting caught speeding is very low, since any competent driver will constantly monitor and correct their speed if exceeded.
There are plenty of buffers to allow a reasonable amount of excess speed.
The speedometer generally understates your speed by up to 10% + 4km/h as per Australian speedo accuracy standards
When caught speeding, they will usually allege your speed to be 2km/h less than the detected speed
So on a 110km/h speed limit, you could be doing up to 127km/h (110 x 1.1 + 4 + 2) on your speedometer before you actually get caught.
@Cheapo333: That's complete rubbish. There's no requirement for inaccuracy in the speedo's reading, a perfectly accurate speedometer is legal.
Under the Australian standard the difference between the true speed and the displayed speed must be less than 10% of the displayed speed plus 4km/h at speeds above 40km/h.
In general modern cars are much more accurate than required by the standard. My previous car was about 4% out at 100km/h and my current car is about 2% out at 100km/h
@trongy: So on a 110km/h speed limit, you could be doing up to 127km/h (110 x 1.1 + 4 + 2) on your speedometer before you actually get caught.
@Cheapo333: Not me, as my car is not that inaccurate. The scenario you describe is possible for a particularly badly manufactured car - my point is that it is not the general case as most cars have more accurate speedometers.
The Australian standard sets the legal limits for manufacturers. If a car it travelling at 110km/h the displayed speed must in the range of 110 and 125 km/h to meet the standard.
If the vehicle's design engineers want to meet the standard, they will not be targetting either end of the range, but somewhere in the middle, tending towards the more accurate reading, but allowing for inaccuracy in the instrumentation. If you were to test a bunch of new cars at 110km/h, I predict would on average display 115km/h, not 125km/h.
The other think to note that the Australian Standard applies to new cars when sold. As far as I know there's no legal requirement to maintain the accuracy of a speedo, only to drive within the speed limit. Obviously, if you want to stay within the speed limit, it's in your interest to maintain an accurate speedo.
Even a common modification like changing the tyres can alter displayed speed. I once knew a guy who had replaced the diff in his car which caused the speedo to be out by about than 25%. I couldn't drive a car like that, but he was very smart and could do the conversion faster than I could sneeze.
Just as you have a responsibility not to "accidentally" hit a person, you have the same responsibility to not "accidentally" speed.
If you caused an crashed and killed someone and it turns out you weere speeding, saying whoops it was accidentally speeding will not make the police go oh okay all good then and you're free to go.
Get off your high horse and entitlement. The standard of care and duty of drivers is shockingly low, and sense of entitlement shockingly high on this country.
Just as you have a responsibility not to "accidentally" hit a person, you have the same responsibility to not "accidentally" speed.
Except, one requires you to keep the eyes on the road, and the other requires you to take your eyes off the road.
Momentarily doing 65 in a 60 zone and keeping your eyes on the road is not dangerous driving.
I live in a very hilly area, and there a few common spots for camera cars. They are all situated to catch you going down a hill. I have never once seen an accident occur where these cameras are, but I have seen multiple occur at the two closest traffic light intersections - not because of speeding but because of poor visibility of on coming traffic when turning. Despite this, there has never been any effort or suggestions made to improve these intersections.
@Harold Halfprice: I can vouch for that, More crashes happen moving at low speeds than high speeds. They often happen at peak hour traffic as well, which further causes congestion.
@Harold Halfprice: Me thinks a Defensive Driving Course should be under your Xmas tree if you can not watch all 3 mirrors, the road ahead and your speedometer. I was fortunate to enlist in a RAAF version as a motorcyclist, and I use the theory in practice everyday, for ever moment I am on the roads, car or bike. One second each, and you will never be busted for speeding, let alone be surprised when some fool does the usually unseen and or unexpected maneuver.
Hence, no crash, and Infringements.
I drive/ride my vehicles, they do not drive me.
Just a thought.
And ACT
You can't miss those Multivan's though, once you've seen enough of them it's almost like your brain has been trained to slow down when you see a white-ish van-ish looking thing stopped on the side of the road.
That's right, but I was just letting all the other out of state people know as well.
@Cartman2530: Let’s not forget when they’re operating, they’ve got a massive sign above their roof. I’ve noticed some even have amber lights flashing but that seems to be inconsistent.
Step 1: Gov't to focus on fining people for speeding more than any other traffic offence.
Step 2: Repeat ad-nauseam "it's not revenue raising, it's about safety".
Step 3: When it makes no difference to the road death toll… continue to focus speeding.
Step 4: Ensure at any reported accident to mention "speed was a factor", regardless of primary reason.
Step 5: Raise revenue, and, deny, deny, deny.
Other countries even do this from unmarked cars.
Guess i will be running WAZE from the google play store full time and updating on the regular for other drivers on the road now
… have you considered not speeding?
Then why do you need Waze to update you of speed camera locations if you don't speed on public roads?
Why do you want to update other drivers who are doing the wrong thing? What do you owe them?
@[Deactivated]: Apart from an emergency, what is a valid reason to speed? There is a "myriad" of them, so it should be easy to pick one. I'm interested in any you have tested and been let off a speeding ticket when you used it?
You are not "helping someone out" by assisting in the commissioning of an offence or enabling people to commit an offence. It's the same as if you were to flash oncoming drivers that there is a speed camera/police car ahead of them. You can be charged with an offence. It's not some altruistic act to help people commit offences.
People who do speed on the roads ARE doing the wrong thing. It's laid out in a section of the Road Rules (Part 3, Rules 20 to 25) and there is no mention of "context" that are exempt from speed limits (apart from closed road racing events with permission from the Police commissioner.)
@Scrooge McDuck: I think this rule will catch those who frequently speed not those who accidentally/etc speed on rare occasions..
@funnysht: How do you come to that conclusion?
A speed camera doesn't pick and choose who to target.
@Kandrew: Same logic as if you speed more frequently you get caught.
Those who accidentally speed do t do it frequently me thinkz
@BankstownMoeyDW: Lol. Ok then.
I signed up to be a card carrying member of the “driving fraternity”. This membership came with certain conditions, one of them being that I must follow the rules. If I don’t follow the rules, my membership could be revoked. I like my membership and it’s perks, so I am happy to follow their rules. It’s an opt-in membership, that if you don’t like the rules, you don’t have to become a member.
So, if following the rules set out in my member’s introduction, to keep my membership from being cancelled, makes me a “pleb”, then call me a pleb.
I am sure there are rules and conditions you follow every day, work, shopping, sports, house or even this website, but adhering to them doesn’t make you a pleb.
And there is a gaping chasm between agreeing with the laws and road rules and following them. I don’t have to like them, and I think a lot of them are stupid and/or archaic, but they are the rules, and if I want to play on the playground with all the other kids, I need to at least follow the rules, lest my membership be revoked.
@BankstownMoeyDW: This study https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01602… indicates that lower levels of intelligence are associated with greater levels of offending.
Apart from an emergency, what is a valid reason to speed?
-When the limit changes suddenly down, say from 80 to 60, I prefer to take my foot off the accelerator rather than suddenly brake, but that is technically speeding.
-If I'm going down a large hill, rather than riding the brake I like to pulse it on and off every few seconds. It means that sometimes I cross over the speed limit by a few k's
Both of those are valid reasons in my book. They reduce fuel use and wear and tear, and don't appreciably raise the risk of an accident happening.
limit changes suddenly down
They don't change down "suddenly". What a lot of rot. The signs are large enough to see from quite a distance off, they don't just jump out at the last minute. Easy to see and roll off well before you get to the speed limit change.
sometimes I cross over the speed limit by a few k's
That's fine, I'm not saying you cant do that, but the road rules you signed up to follow when you applied for your license say you shouldn't do that.
And there is already leeway built into speeding fines to allow for slight overages. Firstly they will give you an allowance of around 2~3km/h or 3% over a certain speed (in most states) and then after that, the fines are graduated. In NSW, it's up to 10km/h, over 10km/h, over 20km/h, over 30km/h and over 45km/h.
There is also leniency built into the system. Under 10km/h and a good driving history, there is a good chance you can apply for leniency and get either a reduction in or a withdrawal of the speeding fine.
You also don't have to travel at the speed limit and above if you are going down hill. You don't have to do 100~105, you could always do your "pulse braking" within the 95~100 range and still have a negligible affect on your overall journey time.
So, both examples easily de-bunked. (I know you're going to neg me anyway because "iT'z rEvEnUe rAiSiNg!!1!1!")
those are valid reasons in my book.
Is your book a court recognised alternative to the Australian Road Rules? If I was to go to court to fight a fine on either of those two examples, could I plead that I was adhering to "outlander's Road Rules 2020"?? If not, than they are not "valid" reasons, but just your opinion/style/operation.
I am not saying that the rules are good or the speed limits are correct for the road or in the best place or that every police officer applies them uniformly. I am not defending the road rules here, some are stupid and some are great, but they are the rules and people know them.
It's not that hard to drive to the road rules. There are a lot of people in here who have not had a fine in their driving career and some people who have lost their license multiple times. What are the "never gottens" doing that the "always gettings" are not? Is it luck or just a shit attitude to following the road rules?
@[Deactivated]: So you'll be speeding and using your phone while driving (to update Waze)?
Watch out for phone use cameras that have no warning signs (and you can whine about that too)…
@MrBear: Nope , ill be updating the app through my 8 inch LCD heads up display once i have come to the next stop or pull over to the side of the road if i have to.
Even if i don't have a LCD display i can still legally touch my phone if its in a fixed cradle , benefits of having a full license.
Enjoy your day.
I'm not baiting you, I'm just baffled over how large communities (FB groups, etc.) can be formed around the idea that they should freely be able to break motoring laws.
Then why would speed cameras, or lack of warning signs be an issue/concern at all?
Regardless of whether the driver is speeding or not, from my personal experience, I see a lot of heavy braking at speed cameras. So often drivers brake suddenly to dangerously slow speeds. Maybe it's just in my area. It could be rubber necking or paranoia, either way, it's a potential hazard on the road.
Having warning of speed cameras can be useful so you can pay more attention where this happens more often. YMMV.
I don't mind speed cameras, I just don't like the people that are already doing the speed limit and suddenly scrub another 15-20kph off their speed just because they've seen a camera car.
That was the point I was trying to make. 15-20kph off.. I wish it was only that. I'm seeing too many people dump down to 60 in a 100 zone. It can be dangerous.
Absolutely, anyone want to see clear examples - head to hume hwy burwood and watch a large portion go from 60 to 50 or even 45
I see a lot of heavy braking at speed cameras
That's typically because people don't know either the speed they are going, the current speed limit or both. In other words, poor driving.
… have you considered not speeding?
Since "speeding" is defined as going any number above the limit - are you seriously suggesting, or assuming, that every driver has the ability to perfectly sit on a ever changing number throughout the tens of thousands of hours they are driving?
I'm not saying that everyone should "speed" like a madman, but I'm saying there is a reasonableness that is completely lacking from some peoples minds on the topic (e.g. the brainless "Duh don't speed duh" attitude the holier than thou have).
The strawman comments along these lines in this thread are so ridiculous it's funny.
Saying people never speed or accidentally speed has little to do with there being a sign or not.
The problem i have with it is the revenue raising side of things, its designed to catch you out like at the bottom of a hill the speed will change from 90-70 and straight away a speed camera is there. Most speed cameras i go through are at the bottom of hills and / or with speed decreases just before the camera. It should be a points system and / or time wasted as in community service , cleaning up the roads etc. When you bring in money, it then makes it too easy for corruption to take over. And Now the government relies on this revenue as part of its budget and expenditure…
the other problem i have is, the people i have seen speed past me have usually been much better drivers and dont create chaos or havoc. While from my experience, the problematic drivers are generally the ones who dont have the skill or experience in driving and are driving too slow and / or double parking / triple parking (school areas) and dont check blind spots or driving in vehicles they cant handle. These guys may get away with it but cause other drivers around them to compensate and a lot of times have accidents trying to avoid them…
Mate the only people obsessed with staying under the speed limit are incompetent drivers. The rest us have been driving for long enough to understand that the speedo is the last place you should be looking on a dangerous strip of road while there are hundreds of things going on around you.
All this "one second can make all the difference" shit they push in their speeding ads yet they don't realise the irony of forcing people to look away from potential hazards, which could easily add a few seconds onto the time it takes for sometime to notice and react.
lol how long does it take you to read your speedo???
If it looks like a car is about to hit you, or there's a bunch of people running around the road, obviously it's not a good time to look at your speedo. May I suggest specsavers, couple of lessons with a driving instructor and some brain games to improve your reaction time.
lol how long does it take you to read your speedo???
Probably like 1 second to look down and read it, and then another 1.5 seconds to look back up on the road and re-evaluate everything around you (blind spots, rear view, ahead etc).
That's 2.5 seconds of driving blind, travelling at least 80km/h on a road where accidents are especially prone to happen. See the logic?
If it looks like a car is about to hit you, or there's a bunch of people running around the road, obviously it's not a good time to look at your speedo.
Agreed, so why introduce laws which force people to look down at their speedo at pre-defined times rather than giving drivers the discretion to decide when it's safe to do so?
I don't like the idea of some pencil pusher in parliament setting a blanket rule that I need to follow no matter what's going on around me. That's silly.
Agreed, so why introduce laws which force people to look down at their speedo at pre-defined times rather than giving drivers the discretion to decide when it's safe to do so?
What pre-defined times? You can't tell if your vehicle is increasing in speed or not? No wonder we need all these rules.
What pre-defined times?
The time when you go past a speed camera or suspect there's one hiding ahead. You're just adding an extra distraction for drivers.
You can't tell if your vehicle is increasing in speed or not?
Well speed cameras will fine you for as little as 6-7km/h of the speed limit, so no it's not humanly possible to detect such a minor speed change without looking at your speedo.
so no it's not humanly possible to detect such a minor speed change without looking at your speedo.
For you. It seems you have difficulty controlling your vehicle.
For some drivers, 1 second can make a difference, and if your child was on the receiving end of being a road statistic because of a speeding driver, where 1 sec or 30m of travel could of made the difference…. think about it.
Me thinks a Defensive Driving Course should be under your Xmas tree if you can not watch all 3 mirrors, the road ahead and your speedometer.
It included the distance traveled at various speeds per second, and the following safe distance per 3 seconds. I was fortunate to enlist in a RAAF version as a motorcyclist, and I use the theory in practice everyday, for ever moment I am on the roads, car or bike.
One second each, and you will never be busted for speeding, let alone be surprised when some fool does the usually unseen and or unexpected maneuver. Especially if practiced with the minimum 3 second following rule, and all the other rules.
Learn to read the road ahead, and to read other drivers positions and intentions ….it is a learned skill, and it is called Defensive Driving.
Hence, no crash, and Infringements, short of the rare unavoidable and truly idiotic driving. Most of what many call an accident is poor or incorrect driving habits creating a Crash potential, which is avoidable by everyone following all the rules, and therefore not an accident At least you will have a better chance to survive the drive more often.
I drive/ride my vehicles, they do not drive me. I drive to the conditions, hills, bends, into the sun, dusk and oncoming bright lights etc and this I learnt to do with experience. You can too, it all starts in your head space, your attitude, and then look under your Xmas tree….then you can learn to use the 1 second rule as well as look at your speedo without crashing into all those potential hazards you mention.
Just a thought, for everyone thinking they can not drive, watch their speed and the road at the same time.
Just FYI
WA hasn't had these for years.
New South Wales is the only state to have (or had) these signs. No other states have them.
Now that it's gone there won't be any more in Australia. Maybe they will have some collectors value…
Qld still has them FWIW
QLD has them for fixed cameras, not for mobile cameras.
Qld used to hide a sign in front of the car but they have been gone for years now. The D-Maxs, MU-X and Vitos up in NQ are still signed on the sides to identify they are Road Police Command.
@stewy: I grew up in Qld - in the 1970s in Brisbane the cops used to hide radar traps (with no warning sign) behind shrubs at the bottom of steep hills
from a stationary position at the top if you didn't touch the pedals your car would be over the speed limit at the bottom of the steep hill unless you held your foot on the brake on the way down
we used the hate the pigs for that - but that was in the good ol' daze of Bjelke Pedersen's Police State of Corruption
as a result of which I found Qld a Great Place to Leave … !
after several decades in the Southern States I've rarely been back there
@Hangryuman: Nothing has changed they still hide at the bottom of straight hills with clear views ahead, you tend to stare at the speedo longer the the road, but thats safe driving I guess.
your car would be over the speed limit at the bottom of the steep hill unless you held your foot on the brake on the way down
How do you have a licence and not know how to engine brake?
Just FYI
WA is a hole
bork bork
A covid free hole at that ;)
only jk…it's a nice place, amazing sunsets
not so amazing sunrises though right
I thought the reason for speed cameras was to deter speeding.
Getting a letter a week later doesn't deter speeding at the time, but a sign sure does.
Knowing there is a camera up ahead defeats the purpose, you slow down, pass it and then continue speeding.
Not knowing when the camera may be means you are constantly rolling the dice and should be more of a deterrent.
I dont understand the "cash grab" argument, drive the speed limit and speed cameras are irrelevant to you.
I guess it's a difference of perspective. Is the purpose of a speed camera to slow people down right now to decrease the risk of accident etc.
Or is it a deterrent that applies generally?
I think it is/has been both.
The road safety people clearly see benefits in specific interventions to slow people down right now like double demerits at high risk times and campaigns that target specific behaviours in particular places and times.
No more signs means they don't have this effect anymore, instead adding to a general, overall deterrent. Since people still do speed, I don't know if it is better to raise the general deterrent a little more, or retain the tactical effect the speed camera signs have at a local point and time.
I'd be very interested in research about this, as it seems like the kind of thing that might have been investigated.
I'm of the opinion that signs (especially without cameras) actually improves safety, removing them reduces it. Increasing fines doesn't increase safety. I've seen some signs that flash and give you a Smiley, or flash Red and show your speed. Something as cheap and simple as that, goes a lot longer way, in helping to remind drivers of their speed and to be conscious of their driving.
I remember reading about this in a psychology journal, where it was debunked fairly hard (fines don't generally stop bad behaviour). So the people in power, they do know this, but increase fines and cameras around anyway, and use "safety" as an illegitimate excuse. So its definitely revenue raising. And if you say "that's preposterous, prove it" then I would retort that something can look sound on the surface, but have underlying causes and effects that are opposite. Think back to the 1940's-1960's when a lot of laws and systems seemed fair and equal to people in USA, but it was actually discriminatory against people-of-colour.
If we really want to increase safety:
- increase transportation variety (some areas okay, some heavily lacking)
- increase road quality (not much need, generally good in Oz)
- increase car safety (ANCAP standards decent, generally great in Oz)
- increase driver skills (…and here's the main culprit !!)
Perhaps instead of 1-2 driving tests, they should make getting your license even stricter. By having longer tests, or more sessions, or probationary period for new drivers (regardless of age/sex/race) that's more stringent. Perhaps we can take some cues from Germany, and their means of obtaining a driver's license.
I'm of the opinion that signs (especially without cameras) actually improves safety, removing them reduces it. Increasing fines doesn't increase safety. I've seen some signs that flash and give you a Smiley, or flash Red and show your speed. Something as cheap and simple as that, goes a lot longer way, in helping to remind drivers of their speed and to be conscious of their driving.
That would be cool to have…..like every road has one of these showing a smiley and captured speed…..
- increase driver skills (…and here's the main culprit !!)
Only race car drivers would have the better driving skills than the average driver….because they know how to control their cars when speeding…
I dont understand the "cash grab" argument, drive the speed limit and speed cameras are irrelevant to you.
The NSW state gov't estimates a year on year increase in speed camera revenues of 4%+ per annum.
The coffers are empty at the moment and I'd predict that any changes they make to revenue streams will be only for the benefit of the government purse.
I trust you worry more about your own coffer than the state government's coffer.
Drive within speed limit, and everyone would be happy.
Hope this concept isn't too much of a challenge to you.
@berry580: Policing people to within a couple kms of the limit results in people spending more time worrying about their speedo than the road.
Anyone that says they can watch the road and their speedo at the same time without any level of distraction is full of shite. Even with a HUD, it reduces the time you are not focusing on this road but doesn't eliminate it.
The only true justification for speed cameras is revenue raising and their is no statistical proof that the introduction of, or changes of, any speed camera program in NSW has actually had any measurable impact on the road toll. That said, at least the NSW speed camera model previously was somewhat fair in that it catches people paying no attention to the road conditions.
If you want to actually improve road safety, then improve road conditions, improve driver training and increase active Policing by humans that have brains plus some sense of reasoning when it comes to issuing fines. All of this costs money though, so instead the Government would rather collect easy cash with speed cameras.
Sadly there are plenty of sheep that believe speed cameras are the be all and end all of road safety. These people if anything are actively contributing to the plateau in road fatality roads because whilst people get warm fuzzy feelings about speed camera, the Government won't actually implement any real road safety measures.
@berry580: I got negg'ed for promoting a drive safe message.
It's apparent many people in Australia thinks speeding is a true blue Aussie right than understanding driving on the road is actually a PRIVILEGE!
God bless Australia.
@berry580: I don't think any of the neggers agrees with that.
I was tempted to neg just because of your comments implication, that the onus of road safety lies only on the driver/speed. At it's core, it simply excuses the governments actions without thought, and neglects the concerns that stewy raised.
I'm not advocating for speeding, but stewy is right.
What irritates me as a fellow motorist isn't so much as people speeding a 10km/h or less, as quite a few of them are actively paying attention. It is that some people are visibly bad at driving, and others are openly negligent by being preoccupied with phones, makeup, work, etc etc. Those are the real dangers. And trust me I've seen my fair-share of idiots on the road (getting stuck in intersection, fender bender whilst eating, hitting poles whilst texting, being indecisive and hitting multiple cars in carpark).
There is no deterrent. Learn what your local unmarked speed camera's look like and look out for them on b roads and highways like you would look out for kids and other pedestrians in the suburbs. If you miss one you clearly aren't paying attention enough to the road to be speeding.
They can't put them where they could save lives, like on blind corners or crests, because there is a very real risk to the operator.
More highway patrol Police would be hired if they were serious about reducing road deaths. But that isn't a revenue positive option.
More highway patrol Police would be hired if they were serious about reducing road deaths. But that isn't a revenue positive option.
But Highway Patrol Police do not stop road deaths, they hand out fines.
Cars controlled by crappy drivers cause road deaths.
drivers cause road deaths.
Durr.
Oh wait, did I just ignore most of what your wrote?
Stupid drivers, inexperienced drivers, suicidal drivers, angry drivers, drunk drivers, talking drivers and tired drivers all cause road deaths.
If a driver goes off on a corner, any deaths are attributed to speed, not in experience, stupidity, distraction, suicide, consumption or fatigue.
If a driver goes off on a straight, any deaths are attributed to fatigue. Not suicide, stupidity, distraction, physical altercation, consumption or excessive speed.
Anyway…
Police have tools to stop many of those behaviors there and then by pulling a driver over. None of those behavours are stopped by a camera in the back of a 4x4, van or canopy and a ticket mailed out two weeks later.
But please, ignore most of what I wrote and the topic we are discussing with your amazing pro privatised speed camera insight.
Getting a letter later deters you next time around, doesn’t it?
The counterfactual being that a sign might have slowed a driver and avoided a crash, while the fine can only affect future behaviour.
Would a slower speed for the area be more effective? Assuming the driver respects signs, as you have assumed.
@cloudy: That might be a good idea. The high pedestrian activity area in my town now has 40km/h zones. This is still too fast, but people do slow down more.
On the other hand, a speed limit increase in a neighbouring town after they divided a road has eliminated speed traps with no crashes. So I guess there is a part about having the right speed limits too.
Or you could assume and act/drive as if there's cameras everywhere all the time?
@Ughhh: There is no shortage of HWP speed traps that are unannounced and unsignposted to produce general speeding deterrence. Yet plenty of people still risk it.
@mskeggs: So what, the solution was to tell people when they should slow down for 5 seconds so they can avoid a fine? They might not be undeterred but at least they'll get fined. Otherwise we can change the punishment.
Welcome to Victoria