Should Traffic Fines simply be Abolished?

[Crazy Dazz]

Seems to me they serve no useful purpose, other than revenue.

Now I don't mind the idea of the government getting revenue from violations, after-all they have to raise money somewhere, but it occurs to me that the effectiveness of monetary penalties depends completely on your wealth, and that simply isn't fair.

For rich ****s and CUBs, a $200 fine (with no demerits) is inconsequential.
But for some families that's the week's groceries.

I also think that it skews Police behaviour. Because its revenue focussed, they don't care who cops to the fine, as long as its paid. That means even with demerits, there's too much scope to easily avoid the repercussions.
It also seems that the methodology is now increasingly geared towards automated revenue collection. Speed cameras and computers issue and collect fines, without any need for human involvement, and therefore nobody bothers to check that the correct person is being pinged.

I also suspect, that a system based not on money but on actually penalising repeat offenders, would be more likely to be targetted on black-spots, rather the straight-stretch speed-cameras we see now.

My proposal is simple: Replace all fines with demerit points, with the number of points and their duration increasing for more severe offences. When your points exceed the limit, your license is suspended until enough points expire to put you X% under the limit.

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

My proposal is simple: Replace all fines with demerit points, with the number of points and their duration increasing for more severe offences. When your points exceed the limit, your license is suspended until enough points expire to put you X% under the limit.

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

[EgoFG]

Very good plan. Speed could be de-emphasized, and points focussed on actual causes of collisions. Perhaps a repeat offense of the same kind gets an extra point.


Maybe a large fee for renewal after points based suspension

lets say the greatest of

1) 2% of your gross income,

2) 0.2% of the value of your primary residence

3) $2000 (annually indexed to CPI)

[EgoFG]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

Corporal punishment

[mike_nofx]

The current system makes sense.

If you can’t afford to lose $200 because you won’t be able to buy weekly groceries, well that should be enough incentive to obey traffic laws then right?

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

The current system makes sense.

If you can’t afford to lose $200 because you won’t be able to buy weekly groceries, well that should be enough incentive to obey traffic laws then right?

Right, so you're saying only poor people should have to obey the law?

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Right, so you're saying only poor people should have to obey the law?

Sure. And let rich folk pay all the revenue.

If you remove all cash fines, the government will still need their revenue and will just bump up everyone’s tax and the poor man still ends up paying.

But as the saying goes, if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. Poor man can’t afford to speed, rich man can.

Though what fine are you referring to as $200 and no points anyway?

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

That's a problem now.
And get this, in WA at least, if caught with a licence suspended due to non-payment of fines, the only penalty is
wait for it,
yup, another $250 fine (with no demerit points.)

Under my proposal, firstly the number of suspensions would be far less, making it far more practical for police to follow up and actually enforce suspensions.
Then, people losing their licences would only be repeat offenders, so imposing a harsher penalty for driving whilst suspended would be warranted. Something like:
1st time - More Points
2nd time - Community Service
3rd time - Weekend Home Detention
etc

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Seems to me they serve no useful purpose, other than revenue.

Now I don't mind the idea of the government getting revenue from violations, after-all they have to raise money somewhere, but it occurs to me that the effectiveness of monetary penalties depends completely on your wealth, and that simply isn't fair.

For rich ****s and CUBs, a $200 fine (with no demerits) is inconsequential.
But for some families that's the week's groceries.

I also think that it skews Police behaviour. Because its revenue focussed, they don't care who cops to the fine, as long as its paid. That means even with demerits, there's too much scope to easily avoid the repercussions.
It also seems that the methodology is now increasingly geared towards automated revenue collection. Speed cameras and computers issue and collect fines, without any need for human involvement, and therefore nobody bothers to check that the correct person is being pinged.

I also suspect, that a system based not on money but on actually penalising repeat offenders, would be more likely to be targetted on black-spots, rather the straight-stretch speed-cameras we see now.

My proposal is simple: Replace all fines with demerit points, with the number of points and their duration increasing for more severe offences. When your points exceed the limit, your license is suspended until enough points expire to put you X% under the limit.

I have a fool-proof way of never giving these thieving bastards anything, nothing, zip, ****-all

I don't do anything wrong - it works all the time for me.

My last traffic infringement was in Wodonga in late December 1997, that's right, 22 years ago, and I do lots of miles

[Franco Cozzo]

Me too Trev - I just haven't been caught

Gotta be like a fly on ****, have a hundred eyes everywhere

If you really wanted to make a stand you just need to run a campaign getting everyone who has been fined to contest them - one of my mates just joined VicPol and he goes if someone contests one of his fines it generates so much paperwork that they'll just drop it unless the person they fined was a smart ***.

[roKWiz]

Yes, all fines should be abolished for Franco. He does us all a major service.
For everyone else, I'm with Trev.
My last fine was 1984 from memory.

[whitelion65]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

What happens indeed!
I hear of a LOT of cases of people with multiple suspensions....no licence for twenty years etc etc....
What to do with these “folk”?

[ozpacman]

I copped a speeding ticket last September. $266 and three demerits. I elected to use the Queensland State Penalties Enforcement Register (SPER) scheme to pay it off by way of 60 bucks to kick off and then $60 monthly instalments.

Personally I wasn't really concerned about the demerits. I'm generally pretty careful about sticking to the road rules and as a result, tickets are a pretty rare occurrence. Thus I'm not overly concerned about accruing sufficient demerits to put my licence at risk.

I do however think about the monetary fine, and I don't think there'd be anyone here who likes to shell out the hard-earned sheckels for a speeding indiscretion.

I do know that whilst I've been paying those instalments I have been a bit more mindful of my speed and pulling my head in accordingly.

So for me personally, the monetary fine is an effective deterrent.

[ute83]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I have a fool-proof way of never giving these thieving bastards anything, nothing, zip, ****-all

I don't do anything wrong - it works all the time for me.

My last traffic infringement was in Wodonga in late December 1997, that's right, 22 years ago, and I do lots of miles

Don't even creep 2 or 3 k's over the limit, even accidentally. I call BS....

[lra]

I don’t agree that fines should be abolished, but as to what $$$ punishment they should be ….. we could argue all day.

What annoys me greatly is the number of drivers who have had their license suspended, but continue to drive, with no regard to road rules. Confiscate their car, and sell it. If it happens to be somebody else’s car…. stiff cheese …. same applies.
A recent accident in Sydney (?), a Ferrari, no licence, over the .05 limit, into a shop front. Good, no insurance, sell the wreck, or crush it. Hit his pocket, hard.

As for camera fines, just revenue raising.
My last fine was in Qld on 29 Mar 2003, notice was raised on 4 April, for doing 115 in a 100 zone, yes, guilty as charged, but I honestly thought the limit was 110, and I was still being passed by other traffic.
The most annoying part was the accompanying letter telling me how dangerous my driving was, how speed kills, and I should drive more responsibly.
Along with the cheque to pay the fine, I sent a logical letter asking why, if I was guilty of such heinous behaviour, I was not immediately stopped by the Police and fined, rather than being allowed to continue on my murderous way.
I got the exact reply that I expected …. Nothing.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Right, so you're saying only poor people should have to obey the law?

your opening post and this one come across like obeying the rules means you are missing out on something. Rich people get to break the rules because the penalty isn't a deterrent equals its not fair to those poorer people?

The problem with society is that everyone worries about someone elses problem. How about just drive your car and obey the rules and don't contribute to the system. Its not difficult.

[Bossxr8]

State governments are too addicted to the revenue.

If speed cameras worked there would have been a decrease in the road toll, but as we know it's increased. Which is pretty shocking considering how much safer new vehicles have become.

But of course these clowns will double down and use more speed cameras in the quest to bring down the road toll, something it has already failed to do. But luckily for them, their revenue projections from speed cameras have increased. Funny that.

[arronm]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

First time its 6 additional points. Second time you go to jail.

[nstg8a]

Time for some judge dredd style law enforcement...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[71cop]

Originally Posted by arronm

First time its 6 additional points. Second time you go to jail.

How nice, more people in already overcrowded jails ( more that we all have to pay for that is ). All is good we'll just build more jails, taxpayer loses again.

[guzzis3]

I've been done for speeding on at least 4 occasions when I KNOW with absolute certainty I was under. There are a couple of other occasions where I am 90% certain I wasn't over.

I drive and ride slow as. I remember in the 90's I was helping a friend move. She was in her 70's then. She was telling me to speed up.

The problem is if you drive a certain type of car, ride a motorcycle or look a certain way teh ***, er cops.... just assume you must be guilty of something. With the rise of speed cameras my infringements have dropped dramatically.

The problem with fines is they create a conflict of interest for the state government and as soon as your safety policies are distracted by revenue raising they are undermined. People get annoyed contributing to the traffic taxes but the real problem is so much worse than that. Every soul who is maimed crippled or killed on the road is a catastrophe for everyone who loved them.

I have been saying for decades instead of a fine offenders should have to attend a driving course of the same value. Conflict resolved, double penalty becomes a triple. Police allowed to enforce as they see fit.

As for revenue maybe politicians could donate part of their obscene salaries and perks to roadworks...

[simon varley]

maybe we should choose? few points + big $$ or many points + low $$

[aussiblue]

Bossxr8: If speed cameras worked there would have been a decrease in the road toll, but as we know it's increased. Which is pretty shocking considering how much safer new vehicles have become.

Not true per registered vehicle or per total vehicle km or however you want to measure it (i.e. just total fatalities) albeit improved roads and vehicle safety are some of the major contributors to the decline.


See: https://www.budgetdirect.com.au/car-...tatistics.html

Every year since 1970 has seen a decrease in the road death toll with numbers dropping from 3,798 in 1970 to 1,145 in 2018. The global average of road fatalities is 18.2 deaths per 100,000 people, with lower income countries suffering a higher prevalence and higher income countries seeing lower rates of fatalities. While Australia’s number of road fatalities is roughly half of those in the US, our fatality rate is nearly twice as bad as the UK’s. Australia is ranked 15th out of 31 OECD countries for deaths per 100,000 population. Europe has some of the lowest fatality rates in the world largely in thanks to measures put in place by the European Road Safety Charter.

and the ABS stats https://data.gov.au/dataset/ds-dga-5...etails?q=crash and https://www.bitre.gov.au/statistics/...crash_database


So using your rational of "If speed cameras worked there would have been a decrease in the road toll" speed cameras must work.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by ute83

Don't even creep 2 or 3 k's over the limit, even accidentally. I call BS....

I love when people bring this up, I love it

"Ohhhh, I was booked for 3 k's over, oh whoa is me" - bull-**** I say!!!

All but a few cars have a 5-10% variation built into the speedo's, so they are reading slow, if you are doing 100 by the speedo you are most likely doing 95 - fact

So, to get booked for 3 k's over you must be doing close to 110 by the speedo, 108+ exactly by the speedo - fact, people know they are going that fast

Never whinge about the 3k's over

it is widely accepted by Police (in Victoria) when using their radar they allow 10%, however the fixed mobile camera's are set for 3k's

So, where do you find fixed mobile camera's? Easy, where it is obvious ****ers speed - pretty simple. Obvious straights on freeways, known 'hotspots', in towns where people should know better, high traffic area's where there is a clear straight run, if you don't know that then hand in your licence

[aussiblue]

And yes; as I have pointed out in past threads on this subject such as https://fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11438485 , whilst it's not a populist or a view widely supported here and elsewhere, the majority of objective peer reviewed research indicates that the judicious application of speed cameras does indeed result in fewer road fatalities. See https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0221267 for a recent 2019 paper that concludes that speed cameras where used reduce traffic accident by an average of 15%. And at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/...etrics-content

Comparison of crash statistics between 2009 and 2011 revealed that the fixed speed cameras installed in 2010 resulted in 23% decrease in the number of crashes involving fatalities and/or injuries, 50% in fatalities, and 27% injuries in the examined regions. Moreover, the fixed speed cameras were found to be significantly effective in their catchment area bands in 7 out of 18 indicators including total crashes, injuries, single vehicle crashes, weekdays crashes, noon crashes, evening crashes, and summer crashes. Consistent with the previous studies, findings showed that the fixed speed cameras were effective, especially in reducing traffic injuries and crashes with fatalities or injuries.

There are doubtless better more relevant studies with similar conclusions; these were just the most recent two I found on Google scholar and I know from previous forum discussion on this issue, however many studies I find, it won't change a lot of peoples views that they don't work so I won't wast my time looking for more.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I love when people bring this up, I love it

"Ohhhh, I was booked for 3 k's over, oh whoa is me" - bull-**** I say!!!

All but a few cars have a 5-10% variation built into the speedo's, so they are reading slow, if you are doing 100 by the speedo you are most likely doing 95 - fact

So, to get booked for 3 k's over you must be doing close to 110 by the speedo, 108+ exactly by the speedo - fact, people know they are going that fast

Never whinge about the 3k's over

it is widely accepted by Police (in Victoria) when using their radar they allow 10%, however the fixed mobile camera's are set for 3k's

So, where do you find fixed mobile camera's? Easy, where it is obvious ****ers speed - pretty simple. Obvious straights on freeways, known 'hotspots', in towns where people should know better, high traffic area's where there is a clear straight run, if you don't know that then hand in your licence

Yep, Usually most have cruise control set on freeways at speed limit so it would read under.

side note....often wonder whether cruise control attributes to a lot of country accidents due to the slower reaction time moving your foot back to the brake pedal as it wouldn't normally rest on the ac pedal. ??

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I love when people bring this up, I love it

"Ohhhh, I was booked for 3 k's over, oh whoa is me" - bull-**** I say!!!

All but a few cars have a 5-10% variation built into the speedo's, so they are reading slow, if you are doing 100 by the speedo you are most likely doing 95 - fact

So, to get booked for 3 k's over you must be doing close to 110 by the speedo, 108+ exactly by the speedo - fact, people know they are going that fast

Never whinge about the 3k's over

it is widely accepted by Police (in Victoria) when using their radar they allow 10%, however the fixed mobile camera's are set for 3k's

So, where do you find fixed mobile camera's? Easy, where it is obvious ****ers speed - pretty simple. Obvious straights on freeways, known 'hotspots', in towns where people should know better, high traffic area's where there is a clear straight run, if you don't know that then hand in your licence

Absolutely agree Trev. I could not have put it better.

[98TLS]

If your stupid enough to speed and the result of being caught is you dont eat for a week then you deserve to go hungry imho. Not saying by any stretch i dont ever drive/ride over the posted limit but theres a time n place for eveything if i get pinged its a fair call so just suck it up.

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by roKWiz

Yep, Usually most have cruise control set on freeways at speed limit so it would read under.

side note....often wonder whether cruise control attributes to a lot of country accidents due to the slower reaction time moving your foot back to the brake pedal as it wouldn't normally rest on the ac pedal. ??

Funny you should mention that. I have seen the extreme of that gem on the Bruce approaching Morayfield BP servo. A clown (sorry to circus performers) war merrily cruising along, resting back, with his right foot resting on the side mirror. Maybe he has a smelly foot, but if something happened, the rest of him would have been smelly. I looked at him while passing and shook my head. Response? Big birdie.

[aussiblue]

And a recent NSW study https://books.google.com.au/books?hl...tralia&f=false showed fixed speed cameras reduced fatalities by 75% in places they were installed 4.1 on page 34. And fatalities increased by 20% when mobile speed cameras were withdrawn in 2009 4.3 on page 35.