justify speed cameras

AUTickford · 27-09-2006, 06:48 PM

The government makes squillions of dollars from speed cameras stating they have them for the safety issues and not for revenue making, record profits are occuring from these cameras yet the road toll has never been higher so they are a waste of time yet they still maintain they do the job. I live in wa and have never seen so many cops cruisin round{good thing} but i think that the young people need to be taught how to handle a car by professional tuition and that will be the only useful thing to do to lower the road toll

:

XR6_661 · 27-09-2006, 06:54 PM

I'm doing a defensive driving course on sunday!

I don't really see a point in speeding.

Another that gets to me is; How people go around saying "*** speed cameras" and all that kinda jazz, saying how they are out to make money...Simple answer to your bitching, DONT SPEED. Simple, if you don't speed, then who cares about speed cameras?

fair enough they may be profit makers, but they sure as hell won't gain profit from my wallet!

Longreach · 27-09-2006, 06:59 PM

I think that if they put another 10 cameras out there and the extra profit made would translate to more officers on the road it would be a very good thing.

If ya get were i'm coming from? Since i'm sure some of the revenue goes to paying someone's wages, which in turn helps the state and the country out.

Casper · 27-09-2006, 07:03 PM

The primary goal of every speed camera is to raise revenue. They simply have no other purpose any more. Statistically they have failed dramatically as a safety device. Therefore, any speed camera in operation today can only be to collect money from the motorist.... where they have proven to be wildly successful.
As the revenue drops (which it does) the government is force to find new ways to trick motorists into these revenue traps. Impossibly low tolerances, insanely variable speed limits that can be changed at will and increased numbers of speed cameras are all there solely for the purpose of collecting revenue.

Doctor Sodways · 27-09-2006, 07:04 PM

Im keen on doing a defensive driving course, just need the cash and time. My first car wasnt capable of doind more than about 100 and i didnt trust it enough to do it very often, 80 was normally the limit. Now i have a car that would be ideal to do a course in im keen. The only problem i see with defensive driving courses is that young drivers who do the courses may get over confident and could cause more trouble for themselves.

GCFordChic · 27-09-2006, 07:04 PM

yeah..speed cameras...bad...money hungry government...dont do anything...more officers not more machines...

_

SEARCH is your friend...
http://www.fordforums.com.au/search....archid=1279716

DOC · 27-09-2006, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

The primary goal of every speed camera is to raise revenue. They simply have no other purpose any more. .

I would agree, and wished the govt would just say they are raising money instead of this were saving lives crap.

Did anyone ( in SA ) see Mr Fooley or treasurer hand down the budget the other night ?, in a back door quiet way he said, " WE have raised the fines on all speeding fines by $10 " My Q i would love to ask Mr Fooley is from his govt stand that they are there to save lives and his statistics exactly how many more lives he plans to save with this $10 increase ?

Also with the introduction of 2 new speed camera's in the city, these are a blatent cash grab and is a total farce, these camera's catch the every day mom and dads going to work just caught up in the normal traffic flow, they reported catching 300 plus people a day on these camer's, they have been placed there simply to raise money and they know it and i would expect to see more like this in the city.

For as long as i can remember i have never seen a fatal on north trce or west trce and the worst that has ever happened is the odd bumper bingle, so the answer 300 fines to normal people per day per camera, that should stop a few bumpers being bent.

but in a black spot there are not enough cars to raise money , hence no camera.

Mr Fooley, stop treating us like Fool's :evilsasmo

ssb2005 · 27-09-2006, 07:31 PM

its not neccicarily the speed cameras that are the problem (i hate them but yeah) its some of the riduculous speed limits that we have. in alot of countries the road toll went down when they put the limits on alot of roads up

99FalconS · 27-09-2006, 07:59 PM

Speeding drivers are not the sole cause of deaths on the roads but if listen to the goverment you would think so. Speeding drivers are easy to catch and make money on the profit from this never ends up on providing more police officers to deal with real crime or making the roads safer.

What brings in more money a new camera or a police officer?????

RegSpec · 27-09-2006, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GCFordChic

yeah..speed cameras...bad...money hungry government...dont do anything...more officers not more machines...

_

Agree 100%, you just have to watch the traffic around you,everyone slows down when they hit the the revenue camera zone,then speed back up after theyve past it???
Honestly these things are all about generating money,end of story.
If there was a cop car driving along in the traffic, everyone would pull thier head in for a lot longer.

Keepleft · 27-09-2006, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EL_661

I'm doing a defensive driving course on sunday!

I don't really see a point in speeding.

Another that gets to me is; How people go around saying "*** speed cameras" and all that kinda jazz, saying how they are out to make money...Simple answer to your bitching, DONT SPEED. Simple, if you don't speed, then who cares about speed cameras?

fair enough they may be profit makers, but they sure as hell won't gain profit from my wallet!

EL, I'm sure your a nice bloke, but you are 'speed limit conditioned', you must think for yourself always as to what constitutes 'safe speed' at point of operation. Often, the true safe-speed will be below the digits appearing on a road traffic sign, or as otherwise stated on paper and in Pdf as 'defaults'.

And again, not all who a fined for exceeding those numbers are at 'speed-dangerous', far from it, just illegal. We therefore DO expect policing action if we exceed those numbers, this is appropriate, but so is policing the multitude of stupid driving behaviours I see each day.

Over utilised fixed camera enforcement has seen other driver errors go unchecked for many years now, the result is plain to see, lousy driving, lousy driver behaviour and manner. We will see, I expect certainly in NSW, an increase in unmarked HWP over the next four years that will target heavily these 'other issues'.

**Silver Ghia** · 27-09-2006, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keepleft

And again, not all who a fined for exceeding those numbers are at 'speed-dangerous', far from it, just illegal. We therefore DO expect policing action if we exceed those numbers, this is appropriate, but so is policing the multitude of stupid driving behaviours I see each day.

Over utilised fixed camera enforcement has seen other driver errors go unchecked for many years now, the result is plain to see, lousy driving, lousy driver behaviour and manner. We will see, I expect certainly in NSW, an increase in unmarked HWP over the next four years that will target heavily these 'other issues'.

In Victoria, speed cameras seem to have replaced police cars. Its been some time now since I've last seen a marked police car on the road.

Its amazing how drivers behaviour improves when there is a marked police car in the area.

However with the lack of police cars on the road, driver behaviour has significantly deteriorated .

The other thing with cameras, is that if someone is speeding at a considerable amount that is quite dangerous, which I have seen too often, there is no one to stop them. They may get an infringement notice a couple of weeks later, however they may have already killed themselves or someone else in the meantime.

bigjim · 27-09-2006, 10:53 PM

I completely agree that cameras (and most of the radar guns) are used solely to raise money (and don't I know it). This wouldn't bother me nearly as much if governments actually used the revenue raised from them to make the roads safer. The amount of money raised by speed cameras far outweighs the amount of money spent on improving roads or driver training, so speeding fines are in effect a tax on people like me who worry more about looking at the road than at their speedo. I already pay through the nose for the privilege of having a car (rego, licensing, fuel excise etc), and don't think I should be contributing more money in the cause of 'road safety' if it doesn't make the roads any safer.

holden-vs-ford · 27-09-2006, 10:57 PM

they target to make more $$.

theres a stretch of road 20klm long near were i live and there is 3 speed camera's in that space how stupid!
cant justify that other than to make money

Paull · 28-09-2006, 04:34 AM

What does a speed camera, an un-marked police car and a copper hiding behind a tree with a radar gun have in common?

They all 'catch' people speeding, that is, everytime a camera flashes or the other 2 bust someone, they have actually failed to prevent the person from speeding. More simply put, this is purely reactive and is the complete opposite of what the Government, Police and Road Safety wand polishers say what they are trying to do eg stop people from speeding!

However, as my car has cruise control and is well used (motor bike has been gone for a few years now too!!), I can see what EL 661 is saying. Bastards aren't getting any more money from me!

photn · 28-09-2006, 08:50 AM

speed camera's do what they where designed to do. slow traffic down and catch people that are speeding. fair enough they may not be dangerously speeding but speeding is speeding and the only thing you can do about it is slow down.
sure people slow down and the accelerate back up but the camera has still done its job, for that breif period the camera has managed to slow the traffic down. the cameras are placed in the most likely places people would speed. or hot spots. there not designed to slow the traffic permanantly or speeders for that matter.

cameras are also there to boast the "watching" factor. like we are watching you and we will catch you when you speed. the smartest thing ive seen cops do especially in the warrick farm speed camera is they sat about 500 - 1k away and caught all the people that speed off after passing the camera's.

i also dont know why people complain. there are 3 speed camera signs b4 any speed camera. like if you cant see them then you shouldnt be driving. its not any1 elses fault that you where speeding and got caught by the camera. its yours. so dont complain.

Casper · 28-09-2006, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by photn

speed camera's do what they where designed to do. slow traffic down and catch people that are speeding. fair enough they may not be dangerously speeding but speeding is speeding and the only thing you can do about it is slow down.
sure people slow down and the accelerate back up but the camera has still done its job, for that breif period the camera has managed to slow the traffic down. the cameras are placed in the most likely places people would speed. or hot spots. there not designed to slow the traffic permanantly or speeders for that matter.

cameras are also there to boast the "watching" factor. like we are watching you and we will catch you when you speed. the smartest thing ive seen cops do especially in the warrick farm speed camera is they sat about 500 - 1k away and caught all the people that speed off after passing the camera's.

i also dont know why people complain. there are 3 speed camera signs b4 any speed camera. like if you cant see them then you shouldnt be driving. its not any1 elses fault that you where speeding and got caught by the camera. its yours. so dont complain.

Try Victoria.. no signs, maximum 3kph tolerance and camera's set up on high volume freeways where they actually cause their own unsafe situations with people suddenly jumping on the brakes and starting a chain reaction behind them.
There is nothing "road safe" about them.. its revenue. Just to prove it they have them on the Westgate bridge. In the last 20 years the only fatality on that bridge I know of was when a person was hit with debis from the other lane. The only reason the camera's are there are to catch people who have missed the variable speed signs (thats right, it can be 80, 60, 40 or whatever they choose).
In Victoria the cameras are revenue.. pure and simple. They have done NOTHING for the road toll based on the TAC's own figures.

photn · 28-09-2006, 09:16 AM

whats the VIC road toll Casper?

Casper · 28-09-2006, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by photn

whats the VIC road toll Casper?

Cant be bothered looking up the last 3 years (although they have actually been higher I believe) however the years before that are:

1997 - 377
1998 - 390
1999 - 384
2000 - 407
2001 - 444
2002 - 397

Now given the speed cameras were intorduced in force in 1999 the difference has been effectively nothing. Sure there is an argument that there are more cars on the road however the simple counter to that is that the Aust road fleet has not a MAJORITY of ABS, SRS, IRS and other safety features fitted to almost every car (on average). Therefore that argument is basically made void. In fact there is only a fluctuation of 10% give or take each year before and after the camera's came in.

Speeding in itself makes up such a small percentage of road deaths that any attempt to justify the revenue raising tactics of speed cameras as a road safety initiative can be dismissed with about 20 minutes of research and about 30 seconds of rational thinking!

To put it in perspective, pedestrians being hit by (non speeding) cars make up more than 5 times the amount of deaths caused by inappropriate speeding, but when was the last time you saw someone ticketed for jaywalking?

MITCHAY · 28-09-2006, 09:33 AM

Perhaps you should stand outside my work for a few hours. Sure slows them down alright, a rear ender will do that. A high probability you will see an accident.

I have never once seen an accident that has happened due to someone running a red at this intersection but have seen numerous accidents and near-misses since they installed the red light/speed camera.

End of the day if someone has a seizure or some other medical condition, it won't stop them ploughing into cars. I've seen people speed straight past it even with signs everywhere advising of it.

Seriously what does the average motorist do when they realize they're speeding? They hit the brakes. Couple that with a traffic light controlled intersection with a red light camera installed.

Yes, you should leave a decent amount of room between you and the car in front but sometimes that isn't enough and I have seen it time and time again.

I NEVER start to take off from a green light until I realize that the other motorists have stopped for the red light or am certain they have slowed sufficiently.

This is in the ACT by the way. Mobile speed vans are a joke too.

Invest the money with putting more cops on the road rather than erecting these poor attempt at safety.

jcxr · 28-09-2006, 09:37 AM

Has any one noticed the cameras on the ring in melb. have all been taken down?

MITCHAY · 28-09-2006, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcxr

Has any one noticed the cameras on the ring in melb. have all been taken down?

They would probably replace them with ones twice as expensive to bring in twice as much revenue.

You Victorians have got it tough, I seriously aint driving there ever!

photn · 28-09-2006, 09:42 AM

believe it or not the mojority of people that die on NSW roads are killed from loosing control of there vehicle at normal speeds. i keep my idea that speed cameras are a good idea. but in saying that one problem is vehicle safety as casper pointed out. not evey1 has the same tech on there cars. also the roads could be inproved. pitty all that money the Government is making not much is going on fixing roads in semi rural areas.

Casper · 28-09-2006, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by photn

believe it or not the mojority of people that die on NSW roads are killed from loosing control of there vehicle at normal speeds.

That's the point. Speed camera's are totally useless in this condition. This is where police HUMANS can make an informed decision and often save lives.

Camera's are for revenue, its an unarguable fact.

Smoked · 28-09-2006, 09:48 AM

Was on the Westgate yesterday. Variable limit was set at 60, most traffic was moving at 80, the camera would have gone beserk. Safety my A55.

Casper · 28-09-2006, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoked

Was on the Westgate yesterday. Variable limit was set at 60, most traffic was moving at 80, the camera would have gone beserk. Safety my A55.

20kph over the limit? OMG?? Were there cars randomly flipping over, driving off the edge, sliding sideways into oncoming TNT laden trucks? Small children being smashed out of their prams by genocidal road manics? It mast have been carnage. If 5kph over is deadly then that would have been Catastrophic! How did you manage to survive? Was it because you were doing the speed limit and therefor invulnerable to any of the harm around you?

Lucky the camera's were there to stop the carnage. Oh, they didn't? They were just making "cash register" sounds?

/sarcasm off.

MITCHAY · 28-09-2006, 10:07 AM

LMFAO Casper! Yeah thats the message we seem to get beaten into our heads. Those who believe cameras are a good idea, I think would believe anything the government turned out. 60km/h is too slow for major road.

Smoked · 28-09-2006, 10:17 AM

That said, I think that because i was travelling 20km/h slower, I was causing a traffic situation. I had trucks, cars etc.. go around me, most times copping abuse from them.

Bud Bud · 28-09-2006, 10:19 AM

Most here may already know what I think about the operation of speed cameras. It just absolutely gripes me that they say they are saving lives, when the road toll has plain and simply plated since their inception. How many more lives will need to be lost before the real issues are addressed?

We do not see enough police presence on the roads any more and our roads overall are crumbling. If these two areas were addressed immediately, I am sure we would see an improvement on road statistics overall.

If the signs said “raising money to create better roads” or "raising funds for more Police presence", and the money was shown to actually address these areas, I for one would appreciate them far more.

And for those of you that still think speed cameras are a good idea let me ask you this. If revenue slips below future budgets, would you accept 90 k/ph limit on the open road and 50 kph/ on main arterial roads? Suburban roads dropping to 40 k/ph with the inner suburbs that already have 40 k/ph as a limit now possible dropping to 30 k/ph. Would this also be considered acceptable?

Remember, Governments are already hooked on this revenue so what measures would they go to to protect the growth in funds from their speed cameras in the future?

dirt 01 · 28-09-2006, 11:00 AM

One thing I just cant stand is where a speed limit is changed for no reason at all. For 50 years people have safely been driving up a hill near here at 100km/h. Now they figure we can only do it at 80?!! So If I am doing 105 like before I will lose my licence!!!

In the mountain roads around NSW speed limits are continuing to be dropped from 100 to 60 or even 40 on some curvy parts! Its as though we cant be trusted to slow down for corners, and so on the straights we also have to go at our corner speed. I dont understand? What a joke. I have no respect for police if they enforce that type of stuff.