safety experts to call on authorities to look “beyond speed cameras” to reduce deaths.

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Oh, they'll increase another tax, one that we can all share the burden of.
So instead of a % of the population making voluntary contributions, we all pay for their antics.

Great work, pay up.

with pleasure - I am happy to pay for an active police presence that notices that someone swerving all over the place at the speed limit because they are texting is way more dangerous than someone who is 6 kays over the limit.

You want to charge people who really are not driving dangerously. Even if it is "voluntary" it is moronic.

Take a drive and see how much revenue a HWP officer could generate just catching people REALLY driving dangerously under the limit. I would see 10 people being distracted by their phone in my 20 minute drive to work each day.

It doesn't take Einstein to work out that more police on the road doesn't cost money, it just doesn't make as much..

[irish2]

Originally Posted by damo76

I was traveling on the kwinana fwy 2 nights ago up near burns beach road, I was doing 117kmh on my motorbike when i was slowly approaching a commodore, eventually i got close to it and realized there were 2 led lights in the back but instead of backing off I continued to do 115kmh in 100km zone.
The cop car was speeding doing 15km over and in the inside lane, i moved to the left lane and went beside them and they didn't give a *****.
Anyway they turned off the fwy as did I and they continued to exceed the speed limit by 10km to 20kmh without any lights or sirens so ***** it i did the same lol.

Lots of countries in Europe where the police sit 60-70km/h over the speed limit. Most of the general population also sit ~50km/h over the limit. No death and carnage like Govco say.

[mitelsx2000]

Originally Posted by csv8

Bristol turns off cameras road toll drops 25%
http://m.bristolpost.co.uk/Number-ac...ail/story.html

Come on AU & NZ DO THE SAME, Camera are just revenue nothing else

[Blue Roo]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

So we switch off the camera's and replace them with an active police presence.
This will magically slow everyone down moreso than the camera thus creating a safer environment and less fines.

Now, who pays all the extra wages when the revenue falls?.

Oh, they'll increase another tax, one that we can all share the burden of.
So instead of a % of the population making voluntary contributions, we all pay for their antics.

Great work, pay up.

No! What you do is tell the Politicians to take a pay cut. Problem solved.

[olfella]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

So we switch off the camera's and replace them with an active police presence.
This will magically slow everyone down moreso than the camera thus creating a safer environment and less fines.

Now, who pays all the extra wages when the revenue falls?.

Oh, they'll increase another tax, one that we can all share the burden of.
So instead of a % of the population making voluntary contributions, we all pay for their antics.

Great work, pay up.

Well all things government spend on come out of one bucket - called consolidated revenue. It is from that bucket is allocated to various departments/programs. So if there was a better more active lobby group calling for more police presence, it does not cost us poor taxpayer in the rear pocket. It is up to the government to sort out and not by an extra tax.

[castellan]

Number one is just stupid idiot fools on the road and a lot of people who claim hell over someone speeding a bit over the limit on a good open road are most likely just that type of a moronic twit and the thing is such people freak out about the cops speeding as well.

I can understand the fools that think that way, just drive there cars ! they are a heap of junk that should not be on the road in the first place and there driving ability's are just totally hopeless.

It's no wonder they scream and carry on like they do.

If I was as ignorant as they and driving a bucket of s--- what they drove, I would think that car that went past will most likely leap of the road at any given second and be smash to bits, because they know the bucket they are driving most likely surely would.

But the fact is not everyone is a idiot fool like them and they are not driving a death bucket like they drive.

Just push down on the car and you find the shocks are gone and I question the driver and 9 times out of 10 will argue with me that all is just fine and the same with tyres, just totally ignorant.

Don't mention the total ignorance most have for truck drivers, because they have totally no idea, not to mention they truly don't want to know, I am sure of that.

[creative]

Originally Posted by The Beast

I think we all agree that speed cameras 'don't save lives' but what is the solution to the problem......

Its very simple..... education education education.


You will not change the current generation of drivers, no point trying, but educate the younger generation to actually drive rather than pass a test and have serious consequences to actions, not just a slap on the wrist, especially for repeat offenders.....

Stop having drivers spending more time looking at the speedo and actually concentrating on what they are doing.

Make car manufacturers include a mandatory hands free system in ALL new cars so there is no excuse.

It wont change anything now as its to ingrained but hopefully the future generations can be improved.

[data_mine]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Out of how many on the highway?
Sure, there may be 3 or 4, maybe more, like i said, you'll never get 100% compliance even if there was a cop on every street.
Remove the cameras and every driver can feel free to push the envelope

The US, Germany, and even up north in NT, places where limits have been removed, it's been proven, the vast majority of drivers find a happy speed, which is often close to the original speed limit, yet accidents drop significantly. Because the drivers can get on with driving not watching their speedo's and for greed cameras.

Yes there's always an autobahn stormer trying to clock their Lambo or AMG at 300+, but the vast majority are doing 150 happily. And it works, cause there's better driver training over seas, where if someone behind you is coming up fast and flashing lights, you move the **** over. Here you'll have some self righteous clown, deliberately try and slow you down.

Fact is our, method of driver training and enforcement is all wrong - but it pays well so it won't change, to do anything else would be costly to the government.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by olfella

Well all things government spend on come out of one bucket - called consolidated revenue. It is from that bucket is allocated to various departments/programs. So if there was a better more active lobby group calling for more police presence, it does not cost us poor taxpayer in the rear pocket. It is up to the government to sort out and not by an extra tax.

So the bucket is a bottomless pit, or does money get taken away from other areas that now are short of funds and problems occur in that area? Makes it worse if income revenue drops as well.

Were talking about state revenue so things like Hospitals, Public schools (the fed gove waste 7 bill on private schools a year), roads and maintenance.

[olfella]

Originally Posted by vztrt

So the bucket is a bottomless pit, or does money get taken away from other areas that now are short of funds and problems occur in that area? Makes it worse if income revenue drops as well.

Were talking about state revenue so things like Hospitals, Public schools (the fed gove waste 7 bill on private schools a year), roads and maintenance.

No it is not a bottomless pit but thats why we elect politicians. It is their job to 'dish it out'. Hopefully they have more information to make informed decisions on our behalf. So lets say for example, and we all hope they have the stats to make such decisions, that road accidents cost Xmillion$ via the hospital system. Then the police say they can make definite inroads into the road toll and accident rate by virtue of a higher presence. This would cost x$. So weigh up the cause and effect and work out which is best. And don't forget, police are still booking people and getting $, dead people do not pay rego or buy petrol, tyres etc and contribute to the tax system. They can still keep their cameras if they keep making money but one would hope that with a higher presence, comes responsibility to do the right thing. Same with fags. Why do governments keep trying to stop smokers from smoking? Because they are cutting the extra revenue raised by taxes or because it pays off in the hospital system not to have to treat the results of smoking.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by olfella

No it is not a bottomless pit but thats why we elect politicians. It is their job to 'dish it out'. Hopefully they have more information to make informed decisions on out behalf. So lets say for example and we all hope they have the stats to make such decisions, that road accidents cost Xmillion$ via the hospital system. Then the police say they can make definite inroads into the road toll and accident rate by virtue of a higher presence. This would cost x$. So weigh up the cause and effect and work out which is best. And don't forget, police are still booking people and getting $, dead people do not pay rego or buy petrol, tyres etc and contribute to the tax system. Same with fags. Why do governments keep trying to stop smokers from smoking? Because they are cutting the extra revenue raised by taxes or because it pays off in the hospital system not to have to treat the results of smoking.

Then they'll book the hell out of people when revenue is down....seeing as the road toll cost will be quite small compared to the aging population. Also we pay an insurance for road accidents.

[olfella]

Third party only cover the passengers from what I know of it. What are your thoughts on a solution?

[Rockape]

The fact we are even talking about lost revenue just proves one thing. Cameras are all about ...... $$$$$$$$$$$$$

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by olfella

Third party only cover the passengers from what I know of it. What are your thoughts on a solution?

Better quality driving standards, if that means you need retesting then so be it. Cars are getting safer every model release but existing cars do need to be scrutinized more because people don't maintain them.
Improvement and maintenance in roads, better systems to try and safe people in an accident.

But this costs money and even with more police on the roads they cannot be everywhere and there are morons out there that will still drive stupidly, illegally, drunk, drugged up (which is now happening more the drink driving) and not thinking. At the end of the day it'll never go to zero so people need to take care out there and go out with the mindset that everyone out there is trying to kill you.

[BENT_8]

So let me get this right, reduce revenue by switching off camera's, improve driver behaviour by increasing police presence.
Police start pickinmg on every little mistake you make to bridge the shortfall in revenue, coz thats what they will get told to do and there will be heaps more of them about to achieve it.

Who wants to start a thread about how they got pinched for a blown indicator globe and how its all revenue raising.

Heres a tip, the grass isnt always greener....

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Rockape

The fact we are even talking about lost revenue just proves one thing. Cameras are all about ...... voluntary contributions

Fixed!

[Rockape]

Not fixed

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Rockape

Not fixed

...lol

[MercurySilver]

Ffs dont change it
Im happy to let them slap as many cameras out there as they want catching peeps
My licence, rego, insurance and fuel is enough coin as it is thank you

[mik]

People assume its only about speed , those out there going out to have a bit of fun on the roads more often than not know where the cameras are , and speed in areas accordingly , not only that,
cameras do little in regard to those driving on the speed limit but still driving like rat bags.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by data_mine

The US, Germany, and even up north in NT, places where limits have been removed, it's been proven, the vast majority of drivers find a happy speed, which is often close to the original speed limit, yet accidents drop significantly. Because the drivers can get on with driving not watching their speedo's and for greed cameras.

Yes there's always an autobahn stormer trying to clock their Lambo or AMG at 300+, but the vast majority are doing 150 happily. And it works, cause there's better driver training over seas, where if someone behind you is coming up fast and flashing lights, you move the **** over. Here you'll have some self righteous clown, deliberately try and slow you down.

Fact is our, method of driver training and enforcement is all wrong - but it pays well so it won't change, to do anything else would be costly to the government.

I have seen that with self righteous clowns deliberately try to slow others down and they are the most dangerous of all drivers on the road and most drive under the limit and if you try to over take, they then speed up.

If you drive a truck they love to slow down before a hill just to be a total moron and I am sure it's done deliberate, they are just playing games on the road, it must be some sort of thrill they get out of it all, I am sure of it.

Or it's just people who don't drive more that 7000 km a year and they are just fools, holiday time comes and here we go the wombats are everywhere.

[aussie muscle]

prompting renewed calls for older driver retesting at a younger age and across all states and territories.

maybe rather than TESTING we should have mandatory TRAINING. we all know students are taught to pass the current driver's test, not trained how to drive.

[BENT_8]

I've said it before and i'll say it again, driver education should be a mainstream subject from 1st year highschool.

Making a mistake on a test or exam wont get you killed, making a mistake on the road will kill you in seconds, what is more important and what do we encounter more often every day.

[aussiblue]

Mr White, who has been in “after-licence driver training” for 26 years and has taught thousands of drivers how to improve their safety behind the wheel, said “we won’t fix the road toll with enforcement alone”.

Expert perhaps, but an advocate and a driving instructor with a vested interest in promoting driver training and therefore a bias, definitely.

[aussiblue]

I was traveling on the kwinana fwy 2 nights ago up near burns beach road, I was doing 117kmh on my motorbike when i was slowly approaching a commodore, eventually i got close to it and realized there were 2 led lights in the back but instead of backing off I continued to do 115kmh in 100km zone.
The cop car was speeding doing 15km over and in the inside lane, i moved to the left lane and went beside them and they didn't give a *****.
Anyway they turned off the fwy as did I and they continued to exceed the speed limit by 10km to 20kmh without any lights or sirens so ***** it i did the same lol

So you've had your bike's speedo tested to confirm its accuracy?

[aussiblue]

The biggest increase, however, is for deaths of those aged over 65 (up by 9.3 per cent) and over 75 (up by 16.3 per cent), prompting renewed calls for older driver retesting at a younger age and across all states and territories.

This is jumping to conclusions. Deaths for the older groups has increased but we have an aging population so this is to be expected. What would be more interesting would be the age segments for the at fault drivers by age. If based on the data here https://bitre.gov.au/statistics/safe..._database.aspx it includes those over 65 who were passengers and pedestrians.

From my own observations very old drivers also generally drive older and smaller cars (dictated by low pensions/incomes) and are therefore more vulnerable than someone in larger and newer car with all the modern safety features. They are also likely to be more fragile healthwise and therefore more likely than younger folk to die in a road accident.

[ute83]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

So let me get this right, reduce revenue by switching off camera's, improve driver behaviour by increasing police presence.
Police start pickinmg on every little mistake you make to bridge the shortfall in revenue, coz thats what they will get told to do and there will be heaps more of them about to achieve it.

Who wants to start a thread about how they got pinched for a blown indicator globe and how its all revenue raising.

Heres a tip, the grass isnt always greener....

Here's an idea. Turn the cameras off and get the cops to go after the units with their fog lights on. And for some cream go after the other oxygen thieves that hog the right hand lane. Instant revenue boost. Govco would have trouble spending all the extra dollars. I for on would like to know how many head on crashes or near crashes are caused by units driving in the right lane on a divided road and then come out to the country on a two way hwy still hogging the right hand lane. It has to factor.