Road Traffic news ..

Biker clocked at 210km/h
By Julia Medew
July 13, 2005 - 10:41AM

What's the problem? He wasn't talking on a mobile phone at the time was he?

Two things shit me here...

1. Media use of "speeding" to support the death trap that is -apparently- exeeding speed limits. Maybe the rider was being a complete dick, or maybe it was no more dangerous than our weekends out (unlikely since I guess a lot of you know the road he was on).
The real issue is that cops receive a gold star for booking someone speeding; full stop.
They have no incentive to look at each situation logically - Which, I'll add, every cop that's ever pulled me over for speeding has been great about. Been pulled over 5 times now and not booked once, and only twice I had to breifly explain why I was speeding in a safety-orientated way (haha) and they agreed.
So, a cop pulls over someone going hella fast, newspapers paraphrase him and print an article, government chuck out some "speeding kills" campaigns and walla.

2. People talking on mobile phones while they're driving. Freekin toolboxes.

As for talking to passengers; any research pysc. will tell you that talking on a mobile phone requires roughly 3 times as much concentration as talking to someone in person, since their gestures, manerisms and ;personality can't be correctly recognised from the tones coming from the phone, whenever you hear something through a phone your brain has to do a quick "Who am I talking to again? What's the deal with them? Oh, that's right... continue".
With a _lot_ of re-programming you can get pretty efficient on the phone eg, talking to your other-half every day for 5 years or whatever. But with all the variations in a mobile phone in a car, it'd be pretty damn hard to train yourself, haha.

Oh and hands free make no difference..?. Duh! Really!?? If the govt. payed attention to any of the independant studies published from various science groups around the world a years they would've know that... but then again, it's very easy to police people who shouldn't be holding a phone
If they recognise a dangerous situation in a reasonably safe time, dropping and phone and getting their hand where it should be would make bugger all diference.
Obviously it's the lack of concentration initially that's the problem. I dunno about anyone else, but I don't find it too mentally demanding to hold something.


Siiigh.
Our roads system is shat.

The real issue is that cops receive a gold star for booking someone speeding; full stop.

What????? Where the fuck do I lodge my complaint. I have yet to recieve a gold star for doing that!

The real issue is that cops receive a gold star for booking someone speeding; full stop.

What????? Where the fuck do I lodge my complaint. I have yet to recieve a gold star for doing that!

Hahaha man that sucks Jas, not even one of those chocolate ones?

The real issue is that cops receive a gold star for booking someone speeding; full stop.

What????? Where the fuck do I lodge my complaint. I have yet to recieve a gold star for doing that!

Jase
how about some brownie points then...?

Here you go Jase...

Attachments

star.jpg (1.71 KiB) Viewed 897 times

Hang on Mick, let me get this right. You're gonna give me a gold star for booking people for speeding?

Wait til the KSRC crew hear about that. They're gonna be pissed!

Ian, not even chocolate ones.

The SA government just put the prices of all traffix related fines up. We were flicking threw them at work the other day, and everyone agreed that it's nothing but revenue making.

Drivers don't get nearly as many fines as they could. Often fines aren't handed out because no-one really wants to hand a fine over to Ma and Pa Kettle with 6 kids and on their way to work at 5 a.m. If fines were less, more would be handed out, but I guess if they were cheaper they wouldn't be as much of a deterrent.

Hang on Mick, let me get this right. You're gonna give me a gold star for booking people for speeding?

Wait til the KSRC crew hear about that. They're gonna be pissed!

Wouldn't be the first time

Anyway I'd rather you got a gold star for using your discression than some bloody bureaucrat for putting in an extra camera.

Interesting Jas, thanks.

Do you (and the others?) agree the fines are priced just for revenue raising, or that the road rules are classified (official or social) for revenue raising too?

Eg, speeding is the big big big no-no, you speed, man, you're in trouble.
Where-as you can change lanes a lot without indicating and get away with it, or slow down in a merging lane... we don't have Indicator Use Cameras or Lane Changing Stings.

So I'm wondering what came first; do we have speed cameras and all that crap because speeding was one of the harshest penalties?
Or is it one of the harshest penalties because it's the easiest thing to police?

The real issue is that cops receive a gold star for booking someone speeding; full stop.
They have no incentive to look at each situation logically - Which, I'll add, every cop that's ever pulled me over for speeding has been great about. Been pulled over 5 times now and not booked once, and only twice I had to breifly explain why I was speeding in a safety-orientated way (haha) and they agreed.

Seeing as though I've just dragged myself into this one, what's with this statement above? You've got away with it 5 times 'cause they used their discression but you complain they get the "gold stars" and have no incentive to use their discression

The real issue is that cops receive a gold star for booking someone speeding; full stop.
They have no incentive to look at each situation logically - Which, I'll add, every cop that's ever pulled me over for speeding has been great about. Been pulled over 5 times now and not booked once, and only twice I had to breifly explain why I was speeding in a safety-orientated way (haha) and they agreed.

Seeing as though I've just dragged myself into this one, what's with this statement above? You've got away with it 5 times 'cause they used their discression but you complain they get the "gold stars" and have no incentive to use their discression

I wasn't actually saying cops don't use discression because they've got no incentive, I was saying they've got no incentive. Thus any discression is for their own satisfaction. Their discression wont be (at least it doesn't appear to be) recognised at a political level, and reflected in policies, and in turn, socialy.

If they were encouraged we might see articles such as "Police officer congradulates man on excellent control of vehicle while avoiding an way-ward pedestrian".
Have you ever seen an article in the newspaper like "Man fined by police in Sydney last night after changing lanes 5 times in traffic without indicating. It is alleged the 31 year old male driver also failed to head check on two occasions when there would have undoubtly been glare in his rear view mirrors."... No, because half of the readers will think "ooh shit, I did that today... pfft. This journalist is boring.".

But I'm probably wrong

Most people would be happy to hear about that as they would have also had someone do it to them.

Most people would be happy to hear about that as they would have also had someone do it to them.

Yeah true. But somehow I don't see it happening any time soon.

im sick of bad drivers....i wish the penalties for "stupidity" were harder enforced, and harsher...like talking on fone, not indicating, not paying attn,..shit like that causes just as many accidents as speed ...

Do you (and the others?) agree the fines are priced just for revenue raising, or that the road rules are classified (official or social) for revenue raising too?

Eg, speeding is the big big big no-no, you speed, man, you're in trouble.
Where-as you can change lanes a lot without indicating and get away with it, or slow down in a merging lane... we don't have Indicator Use Cameras or Lane Changing Stings.

So I'm wondering what came first; do we have speed cameras and all that crap because speeding was one of the harshest penalties?
Or is it one of the harshest penalties because it's the easiest thing to police?

James, like I've mentioned elsewhere, road rules are written for a lowish common denominator. Not the lowest. You may be an extremeley good driver/rider and you may be able to get away with speeding safely. However, Mr Dipshit pulling out of the side street may not be able to judge your speed accuratley and he may pull out in front of you because he thought he had plenty of time.

The laws are there to keep you and everyone else on the road safe.

Have you ever seen a video of a vehicle having an accident at 100km/h? I've got one floating around on my hard drive here from a test that was conducted last year. Two vehicles travelling at 100km/h having a headon. Watch it in slow-mo and HOLY FUCK!!!! What a mess. Had they hit at 30 or 40 km/h the impact would OBVIOUSLY have been less.

My point is, that whilst speeding may have not be the cause of an accident, the increase in speed certainly decreases your chances of survival. It's all very well and good to sit back and say the government should put in triple lanes with barriers diving each direction of travel and blah blah blah. We don't have the population of the European countries and as such the funds aren't as available. The laws need to be made for the condition of the roads as they are.

Now imagine if the Police got around and decided to not worry about anyone doing 120-130km/h on the hiway. Wouldn't take you long to realise you could get away with it. Then all of a sudden, everyone's doing it. That's not what we want. Therefore, the Police need to be seen to be Policing these rules. It helps keep order.

As for speed cameras. I've seen them in some sensible spots. Redlight/speed cameras at intersection are a farken good idea. Bring some more in I say. But most of the mobile speed cameras are in spots where they will obtain the most revenue. Most coppers agree on this.

I also think you'll find that most coppers think that a lot of the road rules are bullshit. Or that discretion can be used when handing out fines. If there was some way you could calculate how many times you've actually gotten away with committing a traffic offence, when a copper has seen you doing it, you'd probably be amazed. The thing is, most cops realise the laws are there for a reason.

At the end of the day, you know the rules. If you break them, it's because you choose to do so. End of story.

I have often thought that as Police, we should be handing out good-driving awards. Maybe have the power to give people extra points or something. But that doesn't make any money for the govt.

im sick of bad drivers....i wish the penalties for "stupidity" were harder enforced, and harsher...like talking on fone, not indicating, not paying attn, doing wheelies and flipping the bike, drink riding, doing burnouts in the CBD..shit like that causes just as many accidents as speed ...

Really?