Going to Court for a First Traffic Offence; Speeding over 10kmh Less than 20kmh, Exeeding 100kmh

Lhrmny on 05/06/2019 - 09:18
Last edited 06/06/2019 - 13:31 by 1 other user

I was pulled over by a highway patrol car at 12:10am after work on the M7 on a long weekend (double demerits). I am a P2 license holder and this is my first offence after holding my licence for around 3 years. I definitely do not deny going that speed but I honestly did not realise that I was that much over the speed limit because there were hardly any cars on the road. It was only untiL I saw the patrol car and checked my speed that I noticed. I completely understand and agree that this is negligent on my behalf but being my first offence and it being double demerits I was hoping to at least get the suspension time reduced. I requested a review and it got declined so I will be going to court this month.

What do you guys think the chances of at least getting the suspension reduced based on the circumstances?

Poll Options

  • 551
    No chance
  • 55
    Possibly
  • 8
    Almost certain
Automotive

Comments

  • 87percent on 05/06/2019 - 09:20
    +94

    No, you were clearly exceeding the speed limit, and going to court is a waste of everyone's time

    • poboy on 05/06/2019 - 13:33
      +96

      Justice Graham Nelson: "OK, sir those are the allegations what is your case?"
      hrmny: "I definitely do not deny going that speed. I just want a lighter penalty."
      Justice Graham Nelson: "I see. On what grounds?"
      hrmny: "On everything. The vibe… Mabo…"
      Justice Graham Nelson: (Looking at the road toll / shakes head)

      • funnysht on 05/06/2019 - 17:55
        +36

        Ppl thinking quoting "the castle" in Australia, will get you off scott free….tell them they're dreaming.

      • MrFrugalSpend on 08/06/2019 - 20:42
        +4

        Don't forget OP's actual defense, its funny enough! -

        hrmny: "I honestly didn't realise I was speeding!"
        Justice Graham Nelson: "I see. So you weren't paying attention?"
        hrmny: "I agree that this is negligent on my behalf, but…"
        Justice Graham Nelson: "Add to the charges, Negligent Driving Without Due Care and Attention"
        hrmny: [Quietly to self] "I should have listened to those people on OzBargain"

        …
        OP - it was double demerits because people die on the roads on long weekends, not the least of which being inexperienced drivers not paying due care and attention in the middle of the night!! Take your penalty and learn from it before the judge makes it even more of a lesson!

        • Jackson on 09/06/2019 - 01:41
          +5

          What I think is interesting is when people post "will I get off a ticket?" the mob will always overwhelmongly say "no", however when people get off the same mob is always complaining that the judicial system is soft on fines. So which one is it?

          Also this is a low to mid range speeding offence. Often its the right move to turn up in court in a suit and sound contrite and explain how the penalty will be adversely affecting you potentially disproportionately to the average Joe, e.g you might be a student that doesnt have pub trans nearby and drive a long way to Uni or voluteering to do meals on wheels in your free timers wont happen anymore. Judges care about this sort of thing, and they care about knowing someone learned from their mistake. If you can demonstrate this the judge may be lenient and lower the consequences. This is perfectly reasonable despite the mob opinion here.

          • MrFrugalSpend on 09/06/2019 - 10:24
            +2

            @Jackson: I don't understand why you believe these need to be mutually exclusive? …The main reason the "mob" say you won't get off is because they expect this of their judicial system. They are reinforcing a belief the punishment is fair.

            When someone happens to sob story / suck up enough to a magistrate to get off the mob isn't happy - after all it could have been one of them struck by the speeding driver.

            Don't forget the judicial system was originally evented to enforce the expectations of the mob in old English times… In USA they still elect some roles of the judiciary.

            The mob expect the laws will be fully enforced and don't like a guilty person worming their way out. What you do point out though is the OP may have more of a chance then this forum suggests, as the mob is answering it how they want to see it done, not from how the magistrate may be lenient if there are other impacts on their life and remorse.

            • Jackson on 09/06/2019 - 11:16

              @MrFrugalSpend: My issue is that theres a lot of good advice on these forums when it comes to technical matters, e.g. the specs of a phone or the process on updating software, but in cases like this the mob is provodong the absolute worst advice that can be given.

              Considering the OP may be unlikely to get advice from a lawyer, it would be a travesty should he not understand that he should turn up to court and put his best foot forward, provided he doesnt turn up looking like an extra from Fast & the Furious

              • MrFrugalSpend on 09/06/2019 - 17:56
                +1

                @Jackson: I see the point you are making, but it would certainly not be a 'travesty'.

                They are not providing the absolute worst advice, they are expecting punishment. Suspend a few more P platers for speeding and they just might avoid bad habits that make a difference to the road toll and injuries.

                Best advice you can give a young person is how to accept you were wrong, take the consequences, and learn from it.

                Whilst we may pretend that OP has already learned a lesson, and remorseful, there's no way if will sink in as much as doing the suspension time to improve long term habits. OP will be very careful and hopefully it will stick.

                What you are talking about is what OP may be able to get away with under grovelling to a magistrate in the legal system, and calling it good advice… That's not the same thing as good advice for life!

                • Jackson on 09/06/2019 - 22:20
                  +1

                  @MrFrugalSpend: How about we answer his question in the best way possible, give the best advice, and then let the magistrate decide what's best in his case? Magistrates see lots of these cases, and I think they are in a good position to decide if they believe the person will reoffend or not, and what a reasonable consequence for that person would be. Often the consequence when let off will be that if the person reoffends they will answer to both offenses, so there is still a strong incentive not to reoffend. Also most people would see just the fact that they have had to turn up in court as reason enough not to reoffend. This guy has a clean sheet for almost 3 years and that counts for something.

                  I think that's a lot better than telling him to fall on his sword and cop it. If you were in his position you would want good advice.

                  • MrFrugalSpend on 11/06/2019 - 00:16
                    +2

                    @Jackson:

                    "This guy has a clean sheet for almost 3 years and that counts for something."

                    …so like 2 and a half years???… wow! (I'm well into my second decade without so much as a parking ticket or a 1 pointer)

                    Reading your comments, you seem almost proud of similar circumstances and getting off almost scot free because you dressed nice and asked for it. However you've had 2 court appearances mentioned below - the hassle of turning up didn't stop you going back. If anything, it seems to have fostered believing so strongly on this you think it is a "travesty" that someone may not go off to court and try to bend the rules, grovelling about volunteer work, and weaseling out of a uniformly prescribed penalty… and that is better than learning a lesson to actually follow the road rules put there to ensure we all drive more safely!?

                    Also, check out Martijn's reply below - its very factual and yet at odds with what you are saying about advice on this forum - It's quite handy advice not to waste time as the magistrate can be ruthless… If everyone wasted magistrates time over stuff like this it'd be ridiculous!

                    Sure, maybe if you strike it lucky you might get a reduction. I did say that I see the point you are making. However, my point is, there's merit too in just accepting you stuffed up, and either stop breaking road rules or if you do and are caught - take the same penalty everyone else does and learn a hard lesson about road safety…? its what the community expects is enforced as I explained above - as evidenced by the votes being +537 in favour of 'not a chance' vs +8 against and +53 on the fence at time of writing! (i.e. I'm explaining why the votes are as weighted as they are, to answer your first query about the "mob" both expecting this request to be refused (which is really 'wanting' it to be) AND complaining of soft penalties).

                    • Jackson on 12/06/2019 - 00:39
                      +1

                      @MrFrugalSpend: 2 and a half years is his entire driving record, so yes it's good. Relatively it might be better than most people. It's also his first offence, and magistrates do care about this, the same way they dont want to throw people in prison for some first offences, it counterproductive because people get to make friends with a bunch of inmates and when they get out and have no money and no where to live who do they go see? It's not as dramatic with traffic offences, but someone who has their license taken away completely is much more likely to drive unlicensed and have an escalation of issues when they are caught again and be off for years.

                      Also if you are going to mention Marijn's thread below, read all the way through. He goes into detail about the cases and they aren't remotely similar. He acknowledges this in his reponse to my comment.

                      What you are actually saying to this guy is to give up his rights to see a magistrate and go through the system. It would be much better for him to learn his lesson without too harsh a penalty, that's why he is asking. You are making the assumption that he cant learn his lesson without time on the sidelines, and really it's the magistrate who's best qualified to make that call. Not to mention that this guys is here for advice, on a scale of 1 to 10 your advice is a holier than thou 1.

    • cashews on 06/06/2019 - 15:28
      +4

      My old boss decided to challenge a speeding ticket after seeing one of those A Current Affair stories on inaccurate speed cameras. He went and saw his lawyer before his court date who convinced him it was more trouble than it was worth.

      When he had his case heard, he pleaded guilty and was told off by the judge for wasting everyone's time.

      • BrokeB-tch on 06/06/2019 - 17:00
        +13

        thats really not how i expected that comment to go

      • Jackson on 09/06/2019 - 01:45
        +2

        As a counterpoint to this I challenged a very similar speeding tickt to the OP and got off almost scot free. A second time I challeneged a did not stop at stop sign where the police woman who pulled me up was present and gave eveidence and we croas examined each other. The judge ruled it was my word against hers and again off scot free. If you have a good record and show up and explain your case in a contrite way you are already 3/4 of the way to getting off.having said that if you turn up in torn jeans and a hoodie wearing sunglasses…

  • FoxJump on 05/06/2019 - 09:20
    +30

    Fascinating

  • sugarfree on 05/06/2019 - 09:20
    +16

    You were speeding

    • jelko on 08/06/2019 - 11:29

      He was exceeding the speed limit.

  • Jimmymancini on 05/06/2019 - 09:21
    +15

    It’s funny how oblivious some people are

  • ThithLord on 05/06/2019 - 09:21
    +35

    Not a chance in hell, mate. On your Provisionals exactly for this reason - to make sure you follow the rules required by your newly obtained license. You've only been driving for three years - it sucks, but that's the hand you've been dealt!

    • Lord Fart Bucket on 05/06/2019 - 19:37
      +15

      I was in court last week. Challenging a fine on a technicality (won), but this is besides the point.
      I sat in the courtroom for several hours, saw 9 cases handled. There were instances where I did feel a little for the person, but the magistrate was pretty ruthless. Out of the 9 cases, there was 1 case where one of the 4 charges was reduced. The rest… all dismissed.
      Sorry OP… not a chance in hell. If you want, plead guilty with reason, you might get a slightly reduced fine but that will be offset by court cost.

      • Eeples on 08/06/2019 - 17:41

        What was dismissed?

        • Lord Fart Bucket on 09/06/2019 - 08:25

          For me, the case against me.
          For others, their appeals.

      • Jackson on 09/06/2019 - 01:50

        You may havr got a ruthless judge, they are not all that bad

        • Lord Fart Bucket on 09/06/2019 - 08:25

          Possibly. Though he was the only one doing traffic cases on that day.

          And seriously… they were all appeals that were a stretch.
          Cases i sat through: A 40 year old woman appealed her suspension for being caught using a mobile behind the wheel for the 4th time since 2015. Her excuse… i was only plugging it in!
          A 19 year old P plate driver with >$10K in fines wants his licence back so he can continue to work (automotive apprentice).
          A 52 year old wants his licence back after being caught 45kph over the speed limit. Excuse was "i was emotional cause my father died 6 days before". Judge responded with "not wise to drive while being emotional". Note that the fine amount probably wasn't an issue as he was caught in an AMG.
          The one i felt sorry for was a guy with a QLD licence who's disqualified in NSW, started a bricks and mortar retail business a few months back, employing several people. He needs his licence to operate the business… also dismissed.

          • Jackson on 09/06/2019 - 22:27

            @Lord Fart Bucket: All those cases seem soundly dismissable. The last one we dont really have enough info to judge because we dont know the initial circumstancea of his suspension or how he managed to get a Qld license when his other license was suspended.

            However none of them are remotely close the the OP's case, who has a clean sheet for almost 3 years and its a first offence. He also sounds relatively articulate.

            • Lord Fart Bucket on 10/06/2019 - 15:58

              @Jackson: @Jackson yep, agreed. And what’s worse, these are the cases with solicitors. Makes you wonder about their advice.
              Last case was a guy caught a few km over the limit in a double demerit weekend that claimed to have a good history in QLD. But that’s his word.

    • kaleidoscope on 06/06/2019 - 13:56
      +3

      chance in hell, mate or
      chance in hell mate or
      chance in hell! mate.
      ?

      not a joke, just curious.

      • ThithLord on 10/06/2019 - 08:17

        As I typed it, man.

  • savage bargain on 05/06/2019 - 09:22
    +6

    Tell 'im he's dreamin'…

  • Yummy on 05/06/2019 - 09:23
    +69

    Member Since 21 min ago

    Not even a Hi.

    • savage bargain on 05/06/2019 - 09:25
      +9

      Dammit, fell for that again.

    • CharityCase on 06/06/2019 - 14:42
      +1

      That's an Ozbargain Offence, ops account should be suspended

    • hrmny on 06/06/2019 - 14:56
      +1

      Hi

      • Yummy on 06/06/2019 - 15:57
        +28

        Hi-speed offence, bro.

    • dufflover on 06/06/2019 - 15:13
      -1

      So he was obviously speeding as obviously as this is a troll thread then.

      • bmerigan on 06/06/2019 - 20:12
        -1

        And you're obviously a grandmother right?

  • geech on 05/06/2019 - 09:25

    It's times like this I am glad my tax dollars are being well spent.

    Do the courts generally impose additional fees to cover costs of such frivolous cases?

    • lltravel on 05/06/2019 - 14:58
      +6

      You're kidding right? You would be surprised where your money is actually going. If you actually knew in detail you would be shocked.

    • oshe on 05/06/2019 - 16:50

      yes, $200 in WA

      • oshe on 05/06/2019 - 16:50
        +1

        unless he wins!

    • Vote for Pedro on 05/06/2019 - 20:39
      +5

      Paying a fine is no admission of guilt. Everyone has the right to contest a fine (didn’t do it or penalty too harsh or mitigating circumstances). The onus is then on the state to prove guilt. Even if guilt proven, magistrate can impose different penalty.

      Seins does reduce enforcement costs though, but also reduces the burden of proof as most people just pay it to avoid the hassle.

      So, do I think it’s frivolous? No, it’s a right. Could there be further consequences? Maybe.

      • kabammi on 06/06/2019 - 23:06
        +4

        I'm voting for Pedro.

      • [Deactivated] on 08/06/2019 - 15:12

        Fun fact : seins in French means breasts.

      • Harold Halfprice on 09/06/2019 - 15:04

        Paying a fine is no admission of guilt. Everyone has the right to contest a fine (didn’t do it or penalty too harsh or mitigating circumstances). The onus is then on the state to prove guilt.

        Paying a fine is absolutely admission of guilt. It literally says so on the fine. And whilst you are right that the onus should be on the state to prove guilt, the threshold of what constitutes proof is set pretty low.

        A police officer's word based purely on their judgement is enough proof in the eyes of the court - same applies with a ticket inspector. So what that means is, if you are already being accused, then almost always the court will be contempt with the level of proof presented and the onus is now on you to prove otherwise.

  • mcneil on 05/06/2019 - 09:26
    +6

    I don't know about everyone else here, but I don't inherently have a Native American ability to judge the speed I'm going based on natural movement and shadows around me. Check your speedo. Always.

    • Rauland on 10/06/2019 - 10:26
      +1

      You can tell speed by wind/tyre/engine noise and how much the car shakes and takes bumps.

      It's not going to be an exact science but if the noise seems excessive then it's an easy look at the speedo.

    • Other on 10/06/2019 - 11:39
      +1

      native americans used to look at buffalo to see how fast they were going.

      You can use a similar system here.

  • Hithere on 05/06/2019 - 09:31
    +26

    this is my first offence

    First time you've been caught you mean.

    I requested a review and it got declined so I will be going to court this month.

    Don't bother. What makes you think you'll get off?

    The magistrate will have heard all the excuses hundreds of times before, you'll still have your licence suspended and to teach you a lesson the magistrate will add extra court costs to the fine you will have to pay.

    Just suck it up and improve your road skills.

  • Ryanek on 05/06/2019 - 09:32
    +15

    A P-Plater getting caught speeding… sorry but this is justice porn for me.

  • Bid Sniper on 05/06/2019 - 09:36
    +1

    Read traffic law, 0% chance. Wasting the courts time

    Lack of cars on roads is not an excuse not to read the multiple road signs informing you of the speed limit.

  • cypher67 on 05/06/2019 - 09:39
    +6

    3 years is not a long time at all, pretty sure on the website 10 years is considered grounds for good behaviour. Take ownership for your actions and don't waste the courts time, learn to use cruise control.

    • Jackson on 09/06/2019 - 01:53

      Been there an 5 was enough, was probably even less. I reckon with 3 he is in for a chance. It's funny how quickly everyone is to dismiss his chances because it's his licence and not their own.

  • Gronk on 05/06/2019 - 09:40

    Absolute zero, stop wasting everybody's time.

  • Ocker on 05/06/2019 - 09:40
    +3

    Look at it from the point of view that this is the only time you have been detected speeding. Your comments would indicate you do not check your speedo too often?

    • Harold Halfprice on 09/06/2019 - 15:07

      Your comments would indicate you do not check your speedo too often?

      He's clearly an unsafe driver. I'm not sure what they teach kids these days at driving school, but it should be eyes on the speedo at all times.

  • blitz on 05/06/2019 - 09:40
    +20

    I honestly did not realise that I was that much over the speed limit because there were hardly any cars on the road

    Please tell the judge this. Use these exact words.

  • Elppa8 on 05/06/2019 - 09:42
    +8

    Please post the results of your court case.

    • mousie on 05/06/2019 - 16:07
      +9

      in mspaint format?

  • chumlee on 05/06/2019 - 09:42
    +2

    Go for it I reckon.

    I doubt the magistrate has heard that defense before so nothing to loose

  • crashloaded on 05/06/2019 - 09:44
    +14

    I stabbed someone but I've never stabbed someone before just let me off ayyyyyy

  • wannagrababargain on 05/06/2019 - 09:45
    +23

    In NSW I believe it is possible to appeal to a court against suspension of a P2 license. But the grounds would not be on the circumstances of how you got caught speeding (don't even bring that into the argument.) Being of a good character, first offence, and needing to commute to work by a car/drop off kids etc is a good start.

    • never waz on 05/06/2019 - 11:19
      +4

      It's the same in SA, you plead guilty to the speeding (just pay the expiation notice), but you may be able to have the auto disqualification lifted if you can prove you are of good character and the ban would punish you more severely, e.g. be unable to get to work, take kids to school, etc.

    • mooseca on 05/06/2019 - 14:55
      +4

      Yeah 6 months ago I got my suspension reduced to 1 month as I need it for work. Just represented myself and also got multiple character references and did not deny I was speeding. Depends on the judge I think but I also had to do 2 weekend courses that cost $150.

      • bmerigan on 06/06/2019 - 20:15

        What were the courses? I'm expecting they'd be a complete waste of time but you may prove me wrong.

        • mooseca on 06/06/2019 - 22:37
          +3

          It was one course spread over 2 Saturdays. Basically was 5 or 6 sections, each one about different aspects of car accidents. The local head of rescue did a talk, some police officers, a woman who lost both her legs in a car crash and another young man who had lost a few fingers and now has an acquired brain injury.

          They spoke about drugs, alcohol, phone use, speeding and a lot of statistics. It was run by the PCYC in NSW, unfortunately I can't remember the name of the course sorry.

          • bmerigan on 06/06/2019 - 23:28
            +3

            @mooseca: Thanks, just wanted an idea what it was about. You've answered well.

  • QW3RTY on 05/06/2019 - 09:48
    +1

    If you plan to have the court reduce or waive your fine by telling them " I was speeding and not paying attention to the vehicles instruments", you've been watching too much TV.

  • Skramit on 05/06/2019 - 09:51
    -4

    LOLCAKES

    So let's assume you're doing at least 114 on your speedo as cops remove 3km/h for calibration. Not many people will have any sympathy for you, doing 114-120.

    • ascorbic on 05/06/2019 - 12:58
      +12

      Not many people will have any sympathy for you, doing 114-120.

      You make it sound like a horrible offence. It's not like OP was racing through a school zone. It was

      12:10am after work on the M7

      The speed is completely sensible for a motorway/freeway and really our low speed limits should be lifted.

      • ChrisLee14u on 05/06/2019 - 16:12
        -8

        Irrelevant. Speed limit at location of offence = 100

        • Euphemistic on 05/06/2019 - 21:12
          +1

          Speed limit at location is less relevant. The speed limit for a P2 licence holder is 100.

          • ChrisLee14u on 06/06/2019 - 04:34
            -3

            @Euphemistic: So hypothetically if it's a 40 zone this is less relevant because a P2 licence holder is limited to 100?

            You on crack?

            • Euphemistic on 06/06/2019 - 07:06
              +6

              @ChrisLee14u: No. It’s a freeway, it is likely to be 100 or 110. Late at night with no one around a copper might have let a full licence driver off with a warning. Exceeding a special limit, like P2 holder, is going to get a ticket to teach them a lesson I’m about driving properly.

              • ChrisLee14u on 06/06/2019 - 07:40
                -7

                @Euphemistic: But he wasn't let off.

                Unsubscribe. Too many 'know it all's' like yourself on ozbargain

                • Euphemistic on 06/06/2019 - 12:30
                  +6

                  @ChrisLee14u: Correct, he wasn’t let off. OP was P2 driver, the sort that police officers like to teach lessons to.

                  Unsubscribe as you wish. Seems you like to be a know it all too and have a hissy fit when someone offers another opinion.

                  • ChrisLee14u on 06/06/2019 - 12:31
                    -6

                    @Euphemistic: Cool story, bro

                    • Euphemistic on 06/06/2019 - 12:33

                      @ChrisLee14u: I thought so. If you can’t handle opinions and know it all’s you’d better unsubscribe form the internet. Know it alls are what the internet is built on.

                      • ChrisLee14u on 06/06/2019 - 15:16
                        -1

                        @Euphemistic: You also forgot to mention that the internet is built on people sharing their thoughts and opinions based on perception (as opposed to facts) + people always having to have the last word…very much like yourself.

                        • Euphemistic on 06/06/2019 - 15:52

                          @ChrisLee14u: I do not have to have the last….. oh.

                          You also forgot to unsubscribe otherwise you wouldn’t have seen the reply ;)

                    • bmerigan on 06/06/2019 - 20:17

                      @ChrisLee14u: I thought you left?

                • Daabido on 09/06/2019 - 09:53

                  @ChrisLee14u: How many apostrophes do you need? Zero. How many more full stops? One. How many more capital letters? Two. Add me to your list.

                  • ChrisLee14u on 09/06/2019 - 13:23

                    @Daabido: Ouch…that really hurt.

                    I hope being the self proclaimed grammar and punctuation police officer of ozbargain gives you a sense of belonging and reason to live.

      • bmerigan on 06/06/2019 - 20:20
        +2

        THIS.
        It's sad that people actually believe if you stick to 99 on the highway no harm will come to you, but if you do 120 the sky will fall

    • Tuftsdude on 06/06/2019 - 22:08

      I drive 115kph to work and back, 4-5 nights a week. Perfectly safe, except when slow drivers sit in the right lane. So what?

      • Skramit on 06/06/2019 - 22:26
        +6

        Woah such a rebel. A god amongst us mere mortals. All hail the speed demon!

      • kabammi on 06/06/2019 - 23:17
        +3

        As a kid (and now sometimes as an adult), I'd dream that we had a James Bond style sun roof, with a retractable rocket launcher that could be raised through it. We had a targeting system that would lock on to drivers failing to keep left, and they would be blasted (a) off the road, (b) off into space or (c) into the left hand lane, where they should be.

        • Tuftsdude on 07/06/2019 - 00:19

          Hahaha, that'd be great.

      • MattyD on 09/06/2019 - 02:01
        +2

        Did you know that annual studies into why so many people like you die/kill in accidents each year specifically call out exactly that attitude as one of the main contributing factors into rampant low-level speeding? Which, btw, is the single most significant common factor in fatality road accidents in this country.

        I'll paraphrase the experts: Statistically speaking, most people don't know anybody personally who has died in a car accident, despite the horrific stats. So those who constantly speed and never die actually become increasingly sceptical of the dangers. Until they die, and - outside of their own family and friends - just become another statistic that other blowhards don't listen to. And around we go.

        tldr: Slow down, champ. Misplaced overconfidence and refusal to heed the warnings of way smarter people is not a mistake you get to make twice.

        • Tuftsdude on 10/06/2019 - 21:25

          I understand what you mean and know a lot of people who have died in car accidents, and it is mainly in a third world country which doesn't have good roads, etc. I firmly believe there are too many slow drivers on the road, especially in the right lanes on freeways, etc. And too many assholes who enjoy holding up traffic, like I saw many times today on a road trip. Most people that speed are confident of their skills and comfortable with it. You'll find the ones that drive slower have a much higher chance of having an accident.

          Thanks for your advice, but I won't be slowing down to a granny speed. I'm very focused and aware on the road more than most.

          • MattyD on 11/06/2019 - 19:59

            @Tuftsdude: Yeah but that's exactly what every person that ever died in an accident (where low level speeding was a factor) thought. And they were wrong too. At least you've still got a chance to do something about it.

            When experts talk about overconfidence they're not just talking about whether you think you're Lewis Hamilton behind the wheel (although that's part of it). The main thing your overconfidence exacerbates is the 1%'ers: a tyre shreds, spill on the road, pothole, child/animal runs out, mechanical fault etc. You're simply not as good as you think you are, and you're nowhere near as safe as you think you are. The speed limits are set by people whose expertise lies in mitigating factors that lead to death on Australian roads. You're not a granny if you do the speed limit, you're just statistically way less likely to die/kill in the way that people like you are statistically way more likely to die/kill. Identifying the assh0le in that dichotomy is hardly Guess Who.

            But the good news is you can continue to ignore all the science based on the fact that you speed and you're doing just fine (like they did) and when you're dead it won't be you that has to live with the burden.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join