Road Toll Keeps Going up While Police Are Busy Barking up The Wrong Tree

RSmith on 20/05/2023 - 10:40
Last edited 23/05/2023 - 14:20 by 1 other user

Another blitz by police…

https://www.drive.com.au/news/police-targeting-speeding-driv…

Like many others in the past. I don't understand why the road toll keeps going up and after every crash leading to a fatality, police regurgitate the same lines…

Speeding was a factor.

A recent crash where a BMW ran a red light and hit a Honda leading to fatalities, the first line from police was… Speeding was a factor, and the second part of their statement was also the fact that the driver of BMW failed to obey the road signs.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/two-killed-in-crash-at-cau…

Speed is easy to measure hence easy to punish the drivers. How someone drives is hard to quantify. Last week I saw a man doing 70 on the eastern freeway. He wasn't speeding, but it was certainly dangerous driving.

If police had a more visible presence, there is actually a possibility of road toll going down. But what we have is an undue emphasis on speed whilst overlooking the other factors leading to road fatalities.

/Rant over.

General Discussion

Comments

    • Leadfoot6 on 22/05/2023 - 22:48

      40 years of no "at fault" accidents whilst driving for a living for a lot of that says I am.
      And I "speed" every time I drive.

      • factor on 23/05/2023 - 20:45

        How many "not at fault" collisions have you contributed to?

  • Hirolol on 21/05/2023 - 09:37

    Yeah, I’ve never seen a car crash and thought “if they put a speed camera here this would have been preventers”

    They need more police presence and less revenue camera
    It’s beyond a joke now.

    • Kangal on 21/05/2023 - 20:06

      We need our measures to target the specific groups and have meaningful consequences.

      I'm all for having speeding cameras in every nook and cranny, if it means: having appropriate speeds posted (ie Not putting 60 when 80 was appropriate), people getting very small fines for accidental/small infractions, while large and deliberate speeding comes with harsh penalties.

      Or we could look at what other cities around the world are doing, and pick out the good and discard the bad.

  • doctordv8 on 21/05/2023 - 10:32

    As you stated, BMW was moving…thru an intersection..against a Red light. that 'moving' part…above the posted road limit or not, is speeding, as he was supposed to be stationary.

    Perhaps he was speeding, and that is why he ran the Red Light? What are ALL the Facts?

    Regardless, any Road Rule broken is Wrong… and the Police are correct in saying any or all contributing factors including Speeding in their statement is correct.

    Everybody, just follow Every Road Rule completely…. and get home to your families each day.
    If you break the Road Rules, against the safety of any other road user or yourself, and get hopefully caught, let alone dead is your choice. But you Do Not have the Right to infringe on any other person for any reason.

  • Waltervp on 21/05/2023 - 11:34
    +1

    Problem is a police presence costs big bucks on the road and a speeding camera in comparison is cheap to install or to contract out and makes enormous amounts of revenue…. easy choice :(

    I think we could make enormous progress by forcing repeat offenders to get speed limiters fitted to their vehicles at their cost and only allowing them to drive speed limited cars for a period. Won't stop them from speeding through pedestrian malls or school zones, but at least it is a good reminder and reduce high speed accidents. Still doesn't stop bad drivers…

    My next initiative is to have ongoing driver education where you can elect to do a one day road safety course at a very affordable price and then receive a 10% reduction in registration costs for the next five years in that state…

    Just saying…

  • Bid Sniper on 21/05/2023 - 11:57

    Easier to ticket speeding than poor driving. Lot of times those garbage drivers do stupid speeds.

    If governments were serious about road deaths, they invest in better public transportation. A lot of people just shouldn't not be allowed to drive.

  • AustriaBargain on 21/05/2023 - 12:19

    The science is pretty clear that increased speed leads to increased deaths in an otherwise same crash. The road speeds are set what they are for a reason. And if you break the law you only have yourself to blame because they put these big 'ol signs everywhere telling you what speed you should not be going over.

    • Leadfoot6 on 22/05/2023 - 22:54

      The open road(non-freeway) speed limit was set at 100km/h in 1978 - the year I got my licence.
      It has not increased since.
      The Albion Park bypass with world class road construction recent opened in the Illawarra.
      Still set @100km/h.

      • AustriaBargain on 22/05/2023 - 23:07

        In SA it's 110km. One of our states must be wrong, both 100 and 110 can't be the safest speeds.

  • the Unforgiven on 21/05/2023 - 12:45
    -1

    We check the speedo way more than checking the road & surroundings
    I rather watch the road than watch the speedo, I have a speedo on the dash from SCA now; it saves me looking down, but still it should not be so

    In Tassie when you overtake a truck or any vehicle, you can't go over the speed limit, or you will get a speeding ticket; what a stupid road rule!
    I would rather spend more time on my side than the suicide
    A truck may/will slow down going up hills & the such, but can go near the speed limit on the flat where there are overtaking lines. You could be stuck behind a truck for so long you WILL get frustrated to the point you just take off (which I did & got a speeding fine; the 1st one in 4 decades)

    • drewbytes on 21/05/2023 - 15:03
      +4

      Impatience - one of the killers. You didn’t need to pass the truck, you were impatient. A good driver shouldn’t need to constantly monitor the speedo. A quick glance every now and then takes a fraction of a second, you’re not starting at the thing. I can generally tell what speed I’m doing and if I’ve drifted slightly above or below the speed I’m attempting to maintain - a quick glance to confirm and adjust if necessary.

      • the Unforgiven on 21/05/2023 - 16:11
        -4

        Guess how long I was stuck behind the truck?
        It was a wet morning, so I was getting mud sprayed on me from his truck; which was carrying dirt
        I could not hang back, as his mate that I passed was faster than him & was right up my arse when going up hills
        And being a truck, the lights are higher than my boot level
        So I was getting a mud bath from the truck in front, blinded by the truck behind & stuck there for a long time; I could not stay there all day as I had to be in court!

        How long have you been driving? What have you been done for in the last 4 decades?
        Did you read where I have my speedo ON the dash, also IN the dash
        Where do you drive? City or country? What state?
        What car do you drive? You can't tell what speed it is going if you have the stereo turned right up
        Is it a manual or an auto? What is the diff ratio? I know more about cars than you, and I have driven longer than you
        What licence type do you have? A car only? A manual or auto? A semi licence? What about a bike licence? I have all of them
        Tell me again how I can't drive!

        • jackspratt on 21/05/2023 - 17:36
          +4

          Realistically, nothing you say above means diddly squat about whether or not you are a competent driver.

          • SBOB on 21/05/2023 - 18:28
            -1

            @jackspratt: What are you talking about…it's common knowledge that if you don't know your diff ratio you can't call yourself a competent driver :/

          • the Unforgiven on 22/05/2023 - 17:59
            -1

            @jackspratt: And UR the best RU? I call bullshit
            Can u tailgate inches @ 90m/h
            Can u pour yourself a rum & coke while doing a doughy around a round-a-bout? My mate used to do that all the time, I used to do other things while doing a doughy around a round-a-bout!
            Can u drift a 6 wheel bus around a corner? Opposite lock it
            Can u do doughy with a bus that u built the motor in?
            Do u come off the freeway on 2 wheels?
            Do u go into the work's driveway with 3 wheels off the ground?
            I thought not. I can drive & you can't. The end /thread

            • SBOB on 22/05/2023 - 18:34

              @the Unforgiven:

              Can u tailgate inches @ 90m/h

              I'm pretty confident at that velocity I could.

              Can u pour yourself a rum & coke while doing a doughy around a round-a-bout?……..
              I can drive & you can't.

              Worse fast and the furious script yet.

            • pharkurnell on 22/05/2023 - 18:39

              @the Unforgiven:

              Can u tailgate inches @ 90m/h

              That proves you can drive? 1000's of trucks do it nightly.. was nightly coming down sesame st on a run from sydney to melbourne

              Do u come off the freeway on 2 wheels?

              most days for decades on my bike.

              • the Unforgiven on 24/05/2023 - 00:16

                @pharkurnell: U get it
                Unlike the Marys around here who wouldn't know what to do when their car gets in a skid. Just let it crash then, see if I care
                I bet u they don't even own a car, they still ride around in a dinky seat
                None never came back with what they drive, they drive nothing then. They haven't had a licence, so they never answer.
                They are just trolls and people here just feed them, maybe they are trolls as well. Trolling through forums to find dirt, is 1 form
                I am bored with this 1

            • Aleigh123 on 23/05/2023 - 09:13
              +1

              @the Unforgiven: This just makes you sound like a horrible driver. How does this help your case?

              • the Unforgiven on 24/05/2023 - 00:16

                @Aleigh123: It takes skill, since you lost the point
                Just like some other dweeb the other day who didn't know what it meant when I know all about the workings of cars

                • Aleigh123 on 24/05/2023 - 00:46

                  @the Unforgiven: Perhaps you don't understand the requirements of being a good driver on the road? Sure, let's say you can do all that, I would argue that a predictable driver is far better than being able to go into a driveway with only three wheels on the ground.

        • dbun1 on 22/05/2023 - 14:18
          +1

          Tell me again how I can't drive!

          You can’t drive

          • the Unforgiven on 22/05/2023 - 18:11

            @dbun1: see above
            just believe UR on the ground while I jumped my bus over you, fun stuff
            It had a Crow cam in her & the heads were done by Mr. Yellow Terra himself!
            No use talking about the rest as no-one here is/was a mechanic

    • belongsinforums on 21/05/2023 - 16:57
      +3

      If you're spending more time looking at the speedo than the road then i don't know how you passed your driving test.

      • SBOB on 21/05/2023 - 16:58

        Back in the good ol days I'm sure they didn't have driving tests like today :)
        Times were simpler, and kids stayed off people's lawns.

        • belongsinforums on 21/05/2023 - 17:00
          +1

          Jokes aside, i just use cruise control habitually. No more worrying about accidentally speeding

          • SBOB on 21/05/2023 - 17:16
            +3

            @belongsinforums: Same.
            One of my pet hates is travelling on area like highways where the use of cruise control is a no brainer, and seeing cars that I know are equipped with it, not using it…and the noticeable speed variation that the drivers 'control' results in..

          • Poor Ass on 22/05/2023 - 15:52

            @belongsinforums: unless you go up a hill on cruise and then a sharp decline then you'll accidentally overspeed 100%

            flat surface is ok

            • SBOB on 22/05/2023 - 16:13

              @Poor Ass: Thats where you do things like disable it as you reach the crest, and then re-enable as its going down the decline, to avoid the issue where the car doesnt know the topological changes.
              Still going to have more consistent steady velocity and less reliance on looking at a speedo

            • Jolakot on 22/05/2023 - 18:34

              @Poor Ass: Aren't most cars built in the last few years equipped with adaptive cruise control? Love using it on small inclines, hop in the right lane and cruise passed everyone without it

              • Poor Ass on 22/05/2023 - 19:00

                @Jolakot: They are but it'll gun up the hill so when coming down it'll always overspeed as it can't see beyond the hill

            • belongsinforums on 22/05/2023 - 19:12

              @Poor Ass: My cc is pretty good. Of course my foot hovers over brake pedal, so i have vastly improved reaction time as a result of using cc

  • lost in transit on 21/05/2023 - 13:08

    I walk around 3-4 times a week for hours, The amount of people texting up and down curvey hills is astonishing, don’t think for one minute it’s mostly young people either…

  • SpicyStew on 21/05/2023 - 13:19

    People relying on police to do any kind of quality work is the problem.
    You don't need any formal qualifications or experience to be part of the police, apart from a high school certificate, a drivers license and first aid training.
    Wrong people to be putting trust into for complex issues such as this and the stats show it.

    • doctordv8 on 21/05/2023 - 17:49
      +2

      I think those thoughts may possibly be stereotyping.

      Basic qualifications may only be required to join initially…although I very much doubt for staying in the
      Force as the job requires a lot more varied and continuous training.

      • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2023 - 04:04

        So you're saying it's easy to become a cop, but after you're hired they fire you if you don't become more qualified!? That makes no sense. Extra training is entirely their own choice (except woke crap of course).

        And he's right… I wanted to become a cop years ago. The main qualifications back then were a grade 3 in English, be above a certain height (the police themselves would tell you to get your height measurement done as soon as possible after getting out of bed because you'd be a little taller before your spine compressed later in the day), and a fitness test. Fast forward to today and we have midget cops criminals could stop by putting their hand on their forehead, with torsos like wine barrels, lard bulging through their shirt buttons, who couldn't jump over a toddlers tricycle and would fall down breathless if they had to run further than the McDonalds counter for their sundae.

        • Jolakot on 22/05/2023 - 18:39

          At least in Victoria, they still have fitness requirements and you must retest 2x a year. Haven't seen many doughnut cops here,

    • hawkshead on 21/05/2023 - 20:52

      I think the police are not fit for purpose in a number of areas.

    • Davo1111 on 22/05/2023 - 10:51

      I didn't realise the police were teaching people how to drive

      • OzzyOzbourne on 22/05/2023 - 17:05
        +1

        The police are meant to police driving rather than leave it up to the speed cameras

    • Jolakot on 22/05/2023 - 18:51
      +1

      The average constable only earns like 70k a year, barely more than a literal clown: https://www.glassdoor.com.au/Salaries/clown-salary-SRCH_KO0,…

      You'd have to be either brave or stupid to deal with society's worst while getting constant hate from all sides for only $70k a year, and the military pays better for bravery

      • belongsinforums on 22/05/2023 - 19:14

        Hard job that the acab crowd could never do. I wouldn't do it after what ive heard about the job

      • jm7 on 22/05/2023 - 21:05

        That would be $70k base plus penalties. Their salary is ~$100k inclusive of penalties.

  • jrvb42 on 21/05/2023 - 13:34
    -5

    Having just been to Egypt I can assure you mobile phone use can't be dangerous. If it was, everyone in Egypt would be dead. This applies to many countries.
    The road toll is directly linked to driver attitude, not distraction. If distraction were truly an issue, children would be banned from cars.
    Any doubters about the attitude comment, go check out dashcams Australia on YouTube.

    • drewbytes on 21/05/2023 - 14:55
      +4

      “Current estimates for Egypt show a road traffic fatality rate of 42 deaths per 100,000 population-one of the highest in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.”. Considering Aus road toll is 4.2 / 100,000 I think maybe your assumption is incorrect.

      • JimB on 22/05/2023 - 15:42

        Only 10x the death rate?

        I'm surprised it's not higher in Egypt with the:
        - driving
        - unsafe cars
        - non-use of headlights at night

        I turn my xenons/LEDs headlights on during the day. Egyptians will purposely turn OFF their headlights at night to save fuel/batteries.. crazy.

    • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2023 - 03:48
      -1

      Well it depends on what they're doing with the phone. Talking on the phone being dangerous is complete nonsense because everyone talks to the other people sitting in their car, sings along to their stereo, etc. And holding that same phone with one hand during a call being dangerous is also nonsense because disabled people with ONE or WITHOUT ANY arms who instead use modified controls aren't slamming into other cars en masse.

      Texting on the other hand and using apps is definitely dangerous BUT it also depends on the car. e.g. I used to have a car with manual steering and I did all sorts of things quiet safely while driving like changing music, adjusting the heater, etc while holding the steering wheel in place using my knees. But then I bought a car with power steering and found I only have to look away from the windscreen for 1-2 seconds for the power steering to amplify a tiny movement of the steering wheel into a 2m shift on the road and I'm about to go through a guard rail.

  • Thaal Sinestro on 21/05/2023 - 13:41
    -5

    Maybe the nanny state should outlaw personal vehicles, or drop the speed limit to 10km/hr. All they care about is keeping people safe at all costs. Freedom is dangerous. Someone could hurt themselves or others. The nanny staters cannot allow that.

    • CrowReally on 21/05/2023 - 20:02
      +6

      You are aware no one has ever taken anyone seriously that uses the phrase "Nanny State", right?

      • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2023 - 03:36
        -5

        You are aware no one has ever taken anyone seriously that mocks people who understand the nanny state is real, right?

        • CrowReally on 22/05/2023 - 12:33
          +6

          "Nanny State" is whining by people who've been inconvenienced by a law.

          Being spotted dropping a chip packet on the ground and getting an on-the-spot fine? Nanny State.

          Pulled over for driving without a seatbelt even though you're just on your way to the local shops it's barely 2 minutes Officer and hardly anyone else is driving this is all just revenue raising why aren't you arresting the murderers and the real criminals yeah? Nanny State.

          Local council saying I have to pay to put a fence around my pool when I don't want to and my kids are all good swimmers anyway? Nanny State.

          I'm fine with having a piss and moan when this happens to you (I didn't like getting pinged for jaywalking/illegal crossing once) but after grumbling and paying the fine, I moved on with my life. I didn't invent a conspiracy-theory level distrust of the government (and tell people that the Nanny State is "real", whatever that would mean (????)). If people didn't get pinged for throwing their chip packets on the ground, there'd be grubby chip packets everywhere.

          • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2023 - 16:06

            @CrowReally: You are not describing "Nanny State" behaviour which is excessive, unnecessary, punitive nitpicking - often contrary to common sense.

            • CrowReally on 22/05/2023 - 16:52
              +1

              @[Deactivated]: yeah everyone, if you want a good source of common sense the first step is to seek out and consult with your internet forum conspiracy theorist

              they're great at appraising the role of government and how intrusive it is

    • Ughhh on 21/05/2023 - 22:25

      You realise you, your child etc could be the "others" right?

      I would like to drive 80kmph down your street if you allowed it.

  • herecomestheoost on 21/05/2023 - 16:16

    :D

  • LFO on 21/05/2023 - 16:34
    +1

    "If police had a more visible presence, there is actually a possibility of road toll going down. But what we have is an undue emphasis on speed whilst overlooking the other factors leading to road fatalities."

    Yes of course and it is so obvious that hurts.

    But REVENUE COLLECTION is the aim of all these "safety campaigns" so nothing that will highlight police presence is allowed.
    Otherwise, why do they "hide between the bushes" instead of standing there on all their glory?

    • OzzyOzbourne on 22/05/2023 - 17:08

      Exactly, actual policing to reduce fatalities costs money, whereas adding speed cameras and stating speed cameras reduce fatalities (whilst coincidentally cars are becoming safer than ever), makes money

  • bathuu on 21/05/2023 - 18:31

    Everyone is glued their eyes to speedo, so they dont brake the rule and speed. Hence more accidents coz no one paying attention to the road.

    • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2023 - 03:33

      Exactly. I bought a car online, flew to VIC, drove it back home over 3 days. In the months before that I kept hearing about how awful VIC was with speed cameras, unmarked highway patrol, radar traps, etc… So even though I never sped, kept on or 10km/h below the limit, I was constantly in a cold sweat, afraid of being fined. The minute I crossed the border I could relax, breathe again, found my vision widen to the wider traffic conditions around me instead of looking down at the speedo.

      • Aureus on 22/05/2023 - 17:16

        If you find it so difficult to go the speed limit, why didn't you buy a car with cruise control?

        • jm7 on 22/05/2023 - 21:07
          +1

          People in Melbourne would have been hating on you for driving 10km/hr below the speed limit!

  • hawkshead on 21/05/2023 - 20:51

    I think its much safer to be on the bus than in a car. I think there's less bus crashes in australia than car crashes. and probably 3.8x safer to be on a train than a bus. there's at least 2x less train crashes than car crashes each year.

    • Ughhh on 21/05/2023 - 22:26

      How many helicopter crashes have we had in Australia in the past decade? We should be flying helicopters instead.

    • AEKaBeer on 22/05/2023 - 07:36

      If there were that many train crashes, the rail network would be shut down. Try closer to 200x for your point hold any water.

  • Shiny Mew on 21/05/2023 - 23:07

    It's simple - the more police target speed the more people fixate on their speedos rather than on what's in front of and around them. Speed cameras and camera cars cause major distractions and are dangerous on long stretches of road (highways in particular) where the legal requirement to travel continuously at a low speed (80-100kmh) causes driver fatigue.

  • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2023 - 03:26

    Another blitz by police…

    Well they have to find other methods of revenue raising without any 60 year old ladies to knock to the ground then pepper spray, or pregnant women to arrest in their pajamas for typing on Facebook they'll be attending a protest.

    Oh and the last thing we need is more police presence. Highway patrol, unmarked cars (can tell by the flashing light on their dashboard), radar traps, etc DO NOT make roads safer, they make them UNSAFE. I gave up speeding decades ago, yet every time I see one of these listed things… I HIT THE BRAKES because with everything going up in price I'm petrified if I get fined I won't be able to afford to EAT. I've noticed the reflex reaction of many other drivers is to slam their brakes on too - they're not speeding, but their foot still bangs down on the brake pedal out of reflex.

  • misu p on 22/05/2023 - 07:09
    +3

    I find it funny how the "most excellent" drivers here keep winging about having to keep an eye on the speedo all the time to be able to keep a constant speed. They "certainly" are good at everything except the speed aspect and that one is of course the government's fault because they cannot properly tell them where the cameras are for them to slow down.

  • ForkSnorter on 22/05/2023 - 07:47

    The 22.6% increase in pedestrian deaths since last year is concerning, this is a much bigger increase than the increase in car crash fatalities.

    While having to monitor one's speed definitely interferes with one's ability to concentrate on the road, one cannot deny that higher speed increases the likelihood of a crash, and the likelihood of injury/death.

    Increasing your speed just a little can increase your reaction distance and your breaking distance massively.

    Say you're driving 10 km/h over the speed limit; in this case you may travel 5m further before you react and hit the breaks, and another 10m further after breaking, increasing your total stopping distance by 15m compared to another car travelling at the speed limit. If you were travelling 20km/h over the speed limit, your stopping distance would increase much further, perhaps 40m further compared to someone traveling at the speed limit. It's important to remember that the relationship between speed and stopping distance is not linear.

    In my opinion, the police should focus more on education and training than placing cameras everywhere. I get paranoid when I drive because there are about 2000 cameras pointed at my car whenever I go anywhere. Also, alcohol/drug testing is more important than speed cameras in my opinion.

    Education/training could focus on keeping a safe distance between cars (the majority of drivers do not keep a safe distance behind the car in front of them), proper signalling, etc.

    Many people don't really realise how dangerous it is to drive. A crash at 100km/h might not kill you, but it will be an absolute disaster no matter what happens. I'm trying to minimise my travelling on the highway because of this.

    • dave999 on 22/05/2023 - 08:51

      It is certainly possible that the increase in pedestrian death has a contributing factor that people are looking at their speedo too often. If you are travelling at 30km per hour and your breaking is delayed half a second because you were glanced at your speedo you will travel over 4 metres further before you react. You may be travelling well under the speed limit but the result is the same as speeding. Pedestrian areas have mostly been reduced from 60km/hr to 40 km/hr but the pedestrian deaths have not improved - clearly speed isn't the major contributing factor.
      I'm not advocating speeding at all, and pretty much agree with everything you have said.

      • ForkSnorter on 22/05/2023 - 09:02

        Personally I'm in favour of lower speed limits inside towns and pedestrian/residential areas.

        In NSW towns, the speed limit pretty much everywhere was already 50 km/h. In contrast, QLD towns have a lot of 60km/h roads. This massively increases road noise in my opinion. NSW towns are much quieter in my experience.

        I've visited cities overseas with little to no cars, and the difference in the atmosphere and quality of life is astounding.

        Cars and excessive driving are ruining Australia. We need more high-speed rail and reliable/convenient public transport. We also need more walkable cities/towns, without locking all the shops/supermarkets away in massive concrete shopping centres that are inconvenient to visit on foot/bicycle.

        • greatlamp on 22/05/2023 - 18:46

          The only way this even begins to get fixed is to have local council actually take an interest in suburb design, instead of selling off land to developers.

          Courts instead of streets funnels all traffic onto a highway and makes the entire suburb unwalkable. Who wants to walk on a 80 km/h highway? But this is promoted because it gets a few extra blocks cut out, and they sell it to council as 'reducing local traffic'.

          Naturally you place a Westfield on the side of the highway instead of designing an actual suburban plaza, and the ownership is held by remote investors who have zero interest in the local amenities.

        • Leadfoot6 on 22/05/2023 - 23:00

          @FS.
          Some of us live in the country and don't subscribe to your socialist viewpoint.

          • ForkSnorter on 23/05/2023 - 07:20

            @Leadfoot6: I was talking mainly about cities and large towns. Cities with few/no cars are just nicer, and convenient to travel around.

            • SBOB on 23/05/2023 - 07:26

              @ForkSnorter:

              was talking mainly about cities and large towns.

              Sure sure….Thats what the socialists want us to think, then bam, they come for us all.
              ;)

              • ForkSnorter on 23/05/2023 - 07:30
                +1

                @SBOB: I know you're being sarcastic. But anyway, I've solved the problem for me. We've moved somewhere we can walk to the beach, and cycle to the supermarket. Train station is also a short bike ride. Just feel sorry for all those people stuck in traffic jams in capital cities or driving at 100km/h down the freeway every morning.

  • dave999 on 22/05/2023 - 08:26
    +1

    Just for sources of information:
    https://www.officeofroadsafety.gov.au/data-hub/fatalities-da…
    https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/migrat…

    Personally I think the continued focus on speeding is counterproductive, it clearly has diminishing returns, and probably negative returns at some point. Speed limits have reduced dramatically, especially in the most dangerous areas where 60km zones are now 40km zones - a 33% reduction in speed, cars are a lot safer with automatic breaking etc and can stop quicker and roads are better designed. Yet the death rate has not dropped significantly. It really isn't that ridiculous to say that there must be some other significant way to reduce the death toll that just target speeding even harder. The biggest problem with the intense emphasis on speeding is all other aspects of driving are almost ignored.

  • payless69 on 22/05/2023 - 08:43

    A black Bimmer?
    Who cares?

  • pnt on 22/05/2023 - 09:51

    Per capita fatality rate seems stable or decreasing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_i…

    For a while I've thought of all law enforcement issues as a balance between cost and benefit.

    You could eliminate all speeding, but it would be at high cost (e.g. more police visibility, or lowering speed limits, etc). Taxpayers don't want like high cost.

    What we have is an equilibrium of fatality reduction at a politically reasonable cost.

    The system isn't perfect, and it is complex involving human decision making (voters, politicians, bureaucrats), but I'd be hesitant to say it can easily be improved, things are often a game of inches in this space (imo).

    P.S. I think I saw once the biggest improvement in fatality reduction since 1970 was due to safer car construction - seatbelts, airbags, crumpling, etc. And that policing had significantly less effect.

  • Jase83 on 22/05/2023 - 09:56
    +2

    I've never understood the "more visible policing" argument.

    With a visible police car parked up or speed camera - the dangerous speeder slows down for 20secs then speeds back up.

    With hidden they receive a letter in the mail gaining demerit points and with a fine. Licence is now at risk. They have to slow down all the time if they want to keep their licence. If they choose to keep speeding, then they are suspended - a win for everyone else on the road.

    • ProggerPete on 22/05/2023 - 11:27
      +1

      Controversial opinion: If the dangerous speeder is alert enough to notice and slow down in response to seeing a speed camera then they are probably not particularly dangerous.

      • jackspratt on 22/05/2023 - 11:30
        +1

        Just ordinarily dangerous, I guess.

        • ProggerPete on 22/05/2023 - 11:36

          Everyone on the road is ordinarily dangerous…

      • Jase83 on 22/05/2023 - 14:54

        I see it on the M1 between Bris and GC often. Car weaving across 4 lanes of traffic, squeezing into gaps doing 130-140. At the obvious gantry and fixed cameras they brake hard, wait to pass then speed back up.

      • bathuu on 23/05/2023 - 04:29

        Better than numb nuts sitting under speed limit causing bottleneck on highway and creating danger for others. No situational awareness or competent driving whatsoever, hence probably more accidents.

    • dave999 on 22/05/2023 - 11:56

      For speed cameras the reason is that are meant to and generally are placed where accidents are likely to happen or have already happened in the past - they are in some form of blackspot. The speeder may speed elsewhere but they won't speed where it is most dangerous to speed.

      As for police cars, when visible, they do seem to pick spots that they can be seen very easily on straight, safe parts of the road. Maybe their logic is if you speed past them and didn't even see them you are a really, really bad driver and need to be targeted.

      • ProggerPete on 22/05/2023 - 14:15

        I would dispute the 'blackspot' theory. Unless the majority of black spots just happen to be places where you can put a speed camera and have it not easily seen. Like the other side of an overpass or behind some bushes at the end of a decline on a dead straight road.

        If somewhere really is a blackspot, then sure, put in a permanent speed camera. Or do they only want to prevent deaths some of the time?

        I do agree with you on the visible police cars. If you're heavy footed but not aware enough to spot the blindingly obvious I'd prefer it if someone encourages you to slow down.

  • ProggerPete on 22/05/2023 - 11:15
    -1

    This is blindingly simple. Let's make 2 assumptions:

    1. The purpose of speed cameras is to save lives.
    2. Speed cameras are effective in saving lives.

    Then the obvious conclusion would be that all funds from speed camera fines should be reinvested back into more speed cameras. Spending money from the fines anywhere else is immoral.

    A quick google brings up that in QLD alone speed camera brought in $190,000,000 in fines for 2019 so this number is probably a conservative estimate for current revenue. Another google indicates that cameras cost between $75,000 and $200,000 to install.

    This means that QLD should be installing at least 950 new speed cameras per year so we should have 10s of thousands of them by now.

    Imagine how safe we could be?

    A side note: I stumbled across this while searching for cost estimates:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11139761/Queensland…

    Nothing says "We want to stop people speeding on this dangerous section of road" like hiding the thing that disincentives people from speeding.

    • belongsinforums on 22/05/2023 - 19:20

      It should be pseudo random. Basically if people think they could be caught at anytime, it disincentives speeding or using their phone. It's the same tactic that keeps millions hooked on gambling worldwide. By the way, some speed cameras are inactive or fake, despite signage indicating otherwise

  • Hangryuman on 22/05/2023 - 13:29
    -1

    '/Rant over' - yeah I saw it started with the title 'barking up the wrong tree' … ;-)

    if they're helping keep me safe, police are good

    if they're writing me a ticket, police are obviously idiots with nothing better to do, and don't they know I pay their salary !?!?!?

  • Metre on 22/05/2023 - 13:37
    +1

    70-80 on the freeway, on the phone at the lights, either no beam or laser beam, etc etc. See it all day everyday. Speeding is easier to blame though.

    • belongsinforums on 22/05/2023 - 19:17

      I see bike coppers look through windows while funneling through stopped traffic to catch phone users. Btw we have plenty of mobile phone cop cameras now. They're Just unmarked so the average road user doesn't complain about them

  • Plug on 22/05/2023 - 16:13
    +1

    Police bark up the revenue tree. Everything else is secondary.

  • OzzyOzbourne on 22/05/2023 - 17:17

    Considering how little road fatalities have improved over the last 10 years when taking into account the huge improvements in vehicle safety and crash survivability, it seems speed cameras do very little to reduce fatalities and most are down to driver error or intentional dangerous driving, neither of which are addressed in any meaningful way. Ie better driver training and stricter policing fundamental driving discipline and cops on the roads.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_i…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join