NSW Government Proposes Removal of Speed Camera Warning Signs

Vote for Pedro on 09/11/2019 - 15:30
Last edited 09/11/2019 - 16:15

NSW Government plans to remove speed camera warning signs. The only state in Australia that has them.

https://www.lifehacker.com.au/2019/11/nsw-speed-camera-warni…

In NSW cameras were installed in known black spots to save lives at those locations. I can certainly say the signs do make me double check my speed and have never been issued a ticket by a speed camera. Supported with the signs, they have been successful. Removing the signs could feel like a cash grab.

On the other hand, the deterrent of not knowing where they are may in fact be better as we would be more cautious all the time. Do the crime, pay the fine.

Thoughts?

P.s. poll options are not scientific :-)

Edit: apparently they’re in SA as well

Poll Options

  • 91
    The signs support the goal of reducing accidents at those locations
  • 31
    You shouldn’t be speeding anywhere, so the signs shouldn’t need to be there.
  • 7
    Who cares I use Waze
Automotive

Comments

  • Hybroid on 09/11/2019 - 15:32
    +4

    Third option: Doesn't matter as should be using Waze anyway which shows you speed limits, camera and police locations.

    • Vote for Pedro on 09/11/2019 - 15:32
      +1

      As soon as i posted I thought that lol. Let me update if i can

  • brendanm on 09/11/2019 - 15:34
    +1

    Implying speed cameras are not simply a cash grab. That's why other states don't have signs. Here we have them on straight sections of 110km/h highway where the only way you can crash is if you fall asleep while having a blood alcohol level of 0.2

    • Vote for Pedro on 09/11/2019 - 15:36
      +1

      Most of the ones in NSW I regularly drive past appear logical locations for safety. One in particular I know was installed as a result of a serious fatality. That said there’s some where I scratch my head. But without looking into them more I can’t say either way

      • brendanm on 09/11/2019 - 15:55
        +2

        Yes most I've seen in NSW have been ok, here in Qld not so much.

        • dammit on 10/11/2019 - 07:28
          +1

          Behind that overpass on m1; ca$hgrab

      • Kandrew on 10/11/2019 - 19:43
        +1

        as a result of a serious fatality

        Um, what's the alternative? A not serious fatality?

        • Vote for Pedro on 10/11/2019 - 19:49

          Does it get boring going around nitpicking when everyone else gets the point?

          • Kandrew on 10/11/2019 - 19:53

            @Vote for Pedro: I didn't say that I don't get the point.

            But do you follow me around to know that that's what I do? That must be a very sad life. But I won't respond further.

  • tebbybabes on 09/11/2019 - 15:56
    +2

    There was also a proposal that I heard on the news that would address this cash grab argument. Apparently there's a push to reduce the fine but increase the point penalty for these offences.

    • Hybroid on 09/11/2019 - 16:01
      +1

      Great news for foreigners that don't accumulate penalty points!

      • mubd1234 on 09/11/2019 - 20:10

        They do, but they only apply in the state they were incurred in.

  • Ughhh on 09/11/2019 - 16:00

    The only state in Australia that has them.

    Huh, they're in Adelaide too

    • Vote for Pedro on 09/11/2019 - 16:02

      My bad, relied on the headline “ NSW Is The Only State With Speed Camera Warning Signs - And They Might Be Getting The Chop”

      • Ughhh on 09/11/2019 - 16:08

        Np. Im curious where Lifehacker came up with that statement.

        • G77 on 09/11/2019 - 16:11
          +1

          VIC has them too..

          • Vote for Pedro on 09/11/2019 - 16:13

            @G77: -sigh- updating again.

          • afoveht on 09/11/2019 - 16:27

            @G77: Not right in front of the camera though, informing you exactly where they are.

            The NSW signs can be considered immediate directives rather than general warnings.

        • SmiTTy on 09/11/2019 - 21:44

          Not sure about other states, but I believe in NSW, the law mandates there must be 3 signs before a speed camera

          I'm not sure what the mandatory requirements are in other states, but maybe life hacker is referring to the more stringent mandating of signs in NSW vs other states

          (just speculating)

  • whooah1979 on 09/11/2019 - 17:32

    Thoughts?

    https://youtu.be/gSbkFLwF_VE

  • mskeggs on 09/11/2019 - 17:33
    +1

    The deterrent of mystery can’t get any higher than it is now when we already have HWP speed traps, so this is both a cash grab and likely to increase the risk of further accidents in these apparent black spots.

    • whooah1979 on 09/11/2019 - 17:53

      Safety camera locations may be found here.
      https://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/speeding/speedcamera…

    • mubd1234 on 09/11/2019 - 20:11
      -1

      HWP have been directed for quite some time to set up in highly visible locations, it's fairly rare to actually see a HWP sitting in the bushes if you glance in your rear view mirror.

      • Vote for Pedro on 09/11/2019 - 20:14
        +1

        By the time you spot hwp, it’s likely they’ve already measured your speed anyway.

        • whooah1979 on 09/11/2019 - 20:16

          they’ve already measured your speed anyway.

          This shouldn't be a problem as long as you're not speeding.

          • Vote for Pedro on 09/11/2019 - 20:19

            @whooah1979: Yes. But the point of my comment was that they don’t really need to hide in bushes.

      • resubaehtgnolhcs on 09/11/2019 - 20:19
        +2

        HWP have been directed for quite some time to set up in highly visible location…

        not always true…

        I consistently see HWP sitting on the on-ramp to freeways - you can't see them on approach (due to it being an on-ramp), and only see them in your rear view after you have passed them. This is common on the M1, M2 and Warringah Freeway

  • exulted on 10/11/2019 - 07:56
    -4

    The classic "Cool I can do 100 in a 60 zone now. A few minutes later, oh shoot, a speed camera is coming up, I'll slow down to 60. Awesome, I've passed it so I'm in the clear now, why not push to 110 in a 60 zone it'll get me to the pub quicker!? Was that a cat I just ran over or a small child, I was going too fast to see. Who cares, there's no speed camera now so it's all good"

    • Kandrew on 10/11/2019 - 19:50

      That mythical classic driver would regularly have problems driving north of Wagga Wagga on the Olympic Highway.

      There are a few spots where the camera cars are positioned, but I often encounter one a few hundred metres - maybe a kilometre or two - further up the road. I've seen them still accelerating, and Flash!

  • jetblack on 10/11/2019 - 08:08
    +1

    This thing I find HILARIOUS :'( about this is apparently the move is being supported by a study that says the removal of warnings is better for safety.

    So c'mon Gladys, which one is it? You'll accept expert opinion to dictate policy, or you won't? Or does it only count when it helps your budgeting?

  • HelpMeiCantSee on 10/11/2019 - 09:04
    +2

    Study after study shows that the most effective way of improving driver safety and awareness is visible policing, with immediate intervention.

    Speed cameras and red light cameras etc do not change behaviour effectively because the consequence is separated from action. Pretty simple psychology behind that one.

    They are however very effective revenue generators.

    • Ughhh on 10/11/2019 - 09:37

      Would be better if a cop was standing visibly at each intersection? Ready to immediately chase and fine the offender?

  • Dont Care on 10/11/2019 - 09:16
    +1

    If you're not speeding at all then you shouldn't need signs to warn you there are cameras to catch you out.

    • whooah1979 on 10/11/2019 - 09:34
      +1

      Your post doesn’t make any sense. Surely we can blame the government for us speeding.

    • Tonyh87 on 10/11/2019 - 10:27
      +1

      If they had sensible speed limits, there would be no reason to speed

  • OzHunterNSW on 10/11/2019 - 11:44

    What next, no Road Works Ahead, no Crossing signs, no Street signs, no Turn Off signs… this govt has lost the plot. Sure you should not be speeding, but what is speed… 2kph over…
    People err, they lapse, they are human. Signs assist in addressing this human trait by providing forewarning.

  • syousef on 10/11/2019 - 12:53

    I wonder how many people who think they don't speed would lose their license within a week if their speed was enforced by GPS devices in the car?

    There is going to inevitably be someone who doesn't understand GPS that will complain they aren't accurate so let me address this. Position on a GPS is inaccurate but with a good fix the error in position is consistent over short periods of time (minutes). So GPS can be very accurate for speed where there aren't many large, dense obstructions even though position can only be given within meters.

    • OpayuOnam on 11/11/2019 - 07:29

      The main issue there would be that GPS is locking on position and using that to calculate speed as measure of displacement between a-b therefore any ramp on the road will affect the actual speed (it can be to favour of against).
      Additionally GPS is not able to always distinguish which road you're in therefore cannot enforce what the speed should be in that road.
      If something is becoming a mandatory law it will have to be very reliable. Don't just look at your everyday scenario consider all the rare and weird positions as everyone has to be using your proposed system.

      • syousef on 11/11/2019 - 07:41
        +1

        Any rise or drop in gradient shortens the ground path and makes your speed read lower than correct, not higher. In this regard any error would always be in the motorist's favour. As for knowing what road you are on, this too could be taken care of by giving the motorist the benefit of the doubt. Only when a position is measured precisely enough to ensure you are on a particular road would you be penalized. It would be very possible with current technology and I am guessing most licenses wouldn't last long.

        But if you think what I'm saying is far fetched, I have news for you:
        https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/02/27/all-new-…
        https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/…

  • SlavOz on 10/11/2019 - 14:00

    Govt wants it both ways. For decades they claimed that the speed camera system in its current state was effective at reducing fatalities and improving road safety. Now they're second guessing themselves and saying perhaps they were wrong that whole time.

    Does this mean every fine issued under the previous system of signposted warnings should be refunded? After all, they're clearly admitting that it's in effective if they're looking to change it. So in fact, drivers fined under the previous system were fined under a system which was not set up to reduce fatalities as they claimed, so fines should be refunded. Pay up.

    • whooah1979 on 10/11/2019 - 14:48

      Does this mean every fine issued under the previous system of signposted warnings should be refunded?

      No. A refund is not required because the drivers acknowledge that they did commit an offence and paid the penalty.

      • Vote for Pedro on 10/11/2019 - 16:05

        If I’m not mistaken, paying a fine is in fact no such acknowledgement/admission.

      • SlavOz on 10/11/2019 - 16:26

        The offence is void as the Govt now acknowledges that the system they were issued under was ineffective.

        • Vote for Pedro on 10/11/2019 - 17:24

          Good luck appealing that one to the privy council ;-)

        • whooah1979 on 10/11/2019 - 17:43

          Revenue NSW won't cancel the speeding fines that have been issued unless there is a dispute over the accuracy of the equipment.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join