Speeding is bad, mmkay?

[floody]

The main reason for this is the PCA law requires a court visit, thus a magistrate gets to listen to the evidence, the character, then provide punishment, whereas the speeding laws have been put forward without sentencing guides for a magistrate, thus you don't have to go to court, and there s no flexibility.

So in a first case dui offender who is the breadwinner for a household and drives to feed that household - as long as it's a first offence, mist magistrates don't want to punish the family for the transgressions of the driver, so give a fine, a course ( the most effective intervention there is) but no suspension. In the speeding matter, there is no place for appeal of the loss of license, it's administrative and the magistrate can do nothing about it.

It seems to me, it's the drink driving that still has access to equity and the judiciary system, but that is by and large not available to the process of removing a licence for speeding and points offences, and therein lies the difference .

The police fail at their job because they concentrate on high volume roads - eg freeway north of Newcastle ( at the limit changes ), but largely ignore known dangerous secondary roads - it's all about compliance for a lot of people rather than seeking out the real dangers.

It doesn't help that govt when they say, we will add 1000 more police for law and order, actually employ 200 general duties and 800 highway patrol - highway patrol generally don't cost anything - they bring in more fines per day than their employment cost. Looking for stuff like people who are 2 days late for rego, using bike racks, turning left on a stop sign without completely stopping, p plates fallen off, using a mobile at the traffic lights - all the heinous stuff that kills lots of children

I agree with most of what you're saying, especially the gap between access to court for DUI and speeding infringements. It should no longer be treated in this way, exceeding .05 is no different to exceeding any other mandated limit.

But when we talk of police 'failing at their job because they concentrate on high volume roads', I am seeing a simple opportunity for motorists to make a major statement. Slow down a couple of hundred metres before the speed changes, don't get booked, job done.
If they're using most of their speed enforcement resources on low hanging fruit locations, and people stop speeding, they would have to change their approach. The same with all the self-judged 'harmless' behaviours (which are another issue in their own right).
I expect they'd either need to move to more patrol based enforcement, move the cameras to locations where more infringements are occurring, be more covert, or they would have to falsify speeds and the wheels would fall off that quickly.

But ask yourself this:
The strategy of police is well known, so why do people keep submitting themselves to be booked when it is so easily avoided? It is a conscious choice I believe.

 

[pharmaboy]

I think your missing the point floody, they have changed strategy to keep the fines flowing, whatever the fines maybe for. So for instance , if they are having no luck booking people in a school zone when kids are around ( ie the safety part of the law), then they go setup at 8am in the morning, well before any school kids are around. Better than that, they usually set up is an area with traffic lights, so people stop at the traffic lights then take off normally, forgetting they past a school zone sign 4 minutes ago. Bingo - one booked motorist, and absolutely no safety gain whatsoever.

Ultimately this concept of "compliance" as the solution to the road toll is driven by govt because it doesn't cost them money, as opposed to road design, or driver training or whatever. In addition, compliance doesn't add anything to driver skill, it probably reduces it - just drive slow and straight and don't think.

Whatever behaviour change you get from the public makes little or no difference, because all sorts of laws are broken all the time - just check how often people cross solid white lines between lanes - I reckon 50% of people don't realise it's an offence. People rarely stop at the line before a crossing when it's at a stop sign as well - there is a multitude of rules and regulations that are routinely misunderstood or disobeyed. Most won't effect safety, but you can't just cut off the revenue stream, and certainly not from an entire population - can't be done.

BTW, I have no choice but to notice these things because of the stupid amount of time I spend on the roads - in my experience, a significant proportion of people who start a job that requires lots of driving in unfamiliar areas will come very close to losing their license in the first 12 months - especially in Victoria. All sorts of offences too, it's not just speeding

 

[scblack]

yet if someone crashes a car, police will refuse to attend unless a tow truck is required.

That has now changed.

Police will now only attend if there is a person injured.

 

[Ackland]

I think your missing the point floody, they have changed strategy to keep the fines flowing, whatever the fines maybe for. So for instance , if they are having no luck booking people in a school zone when kids are around ( ie the safety part of the law), then they go setup at 8am in the morning, well before any school kids are around. Better than that, they usually set up is an area with traffic lights, so people stop at the traffic lights then take off normally, forgetting they past a school zone sign 4 minutes ago. Bingo - one booked motorist, and absolutely no safety gain whatsoever.

This! Pisses me off sooooo much!

I got done doing 60 in a 50 zone. Pulled out of a mate's driveway as I was exiting a small hills town ~100m from the 100kmh zone... several hundred dollars later... I was no safer

 

[redbruce]

I've watched this a few times now... Its a road safety ad from the UK. The driver of the car got done for "Causing death by dangerous driving" even know the motorcyclist was approaching him at 97mph (nearly 160kph). Sad for everyone involved.
His mother released the footage from his helmet cam to educate others, little did he know but he was filming his own death.

My primary transport is motorbike and I do up to 30,000k a year on it. This is one of my constant fears.

Having said that the only time I would be doing that speed is at a track day. It is evident he was pushing his luck given the environment from the moment he left the track. I also see that all to often after a day at the races.

I'm also very conscious of the importance of conspicuity (hi vis vest, red jacket and bike, loud exhaust, 190cm tall) and predictability, but still regularly have people pull out, veer over etc.

Motorcyclists as a cohort appear to have even more misplaced confidence in their own ability (and/or immortality) and less ability to rationally assess and manage risk than the general road using population.

My previous workplace was across town. Every (fine weather) morning I would see the same riders as they sped past me, usually well over the speed limit, lane splitting on down the freeway. Unfortunately in the space of 5 years I was to eventually see 6 of them dead further down the road.

This! Pisses me off sooooo much!

I got done doing 60 in a 50 zone. Pulled out of a mate's driveway as I was exiting a small hills town ~100m from the 100kmh zone... several hundred dollars later... I was no safer

In Victoria you can appeal for leniency if you meet the criteria:
http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?document_id=10369

I assume the criteria is based on an assumption everyone can err and your past history provides some evidence to determine whether its a habit or one off.

There is one in SA as well (albeit with less specific guidelines).
http://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch20s02.php

 

[slippy]

In Victoria you can appeal for leniency if you meet the criteria:

There is one in SA as well (albeit with less specific guidelines).
http://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch20s02.php

"WHEN they reject your appeal...."

 

[DMan]

My primary transport is motorbike and I do up to 30,000k a year on it. This is one of my constant fears.

Having said that the only time I would be doing that speed is at a track day. It is evident he was pushing his luck given the environment from the moment he left the track. I also see that all to often after a day at the races.

I'm also very conscious of the importance of conspicuity (hi vis vest, red jacket and bike, loud exhaust, 190cm tall) and predictability, but still regularly have people pull out, veer over etc.

Motorcyclists as a cohort appear to have even more misplaced confidence in their own ability (and/or immortality) and less ability to rationally assess and manage risk than the general road using population.

My previous workplace was across town. Every (fine weather) morning I would see the same riders as they sped past me, usually well over the speed limit, lane splitting on down the freeway. Unfortunately in the space of 5 years I was to eventually see 6 of them dead further down the road.



In Victoria you can appeal for leniency if you meet the criteria:
http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?document_id=10369

I assume the criteria is based on an assumption everyone can err and your past history provides some evidence to determine whether its a habit or one off.

There is one in SA as well (albeit with less specific guidelines).
http://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch20s02.php

That clip made my blood run cold. You sort of knew what was going to happen, even without knowing beforehand what was coming. As an avid motorcycle rider I've never trusted other road users to stick to the road rules and have always driven defensively. Sad, sad event but riding at 160kph in a residential area you are the mercy of the gods.

 

[pharmaboy]

Motorcyclists as a cohort appear to have even more misplaced confidence in their own ability (and/or immortality) and less ability to rationally assess and manage risk than the general road using population.
]

This is interesting, and (please don't get your back up) but somewhat ironic.

As I'm sure you are aware, motorcyclists are exposed to around 20 times the risk of a car driver for fatality on a per km basis. Now I agree with what you said, that in order to accept that kind of risk increase, motorcyclists are underplaying that risk or rationalising it.

The most common form of rationalisation I've seen of that very question, is that the motorcyclists that are killed, are poorly skilled, risky riders, speeders, an accident waiting to happen etc. so as soon as I read what you wrote that's what I thought of, and the very next paragraph goes into a bunch of examples of how other motorcyclists (ie NOT redbruce) are dangerous.

This is a very common human error in risk judgement - it's a typical response to it won't happen to me because........ It's very much part of the blame the victim syndrome - the crux of it isn't to blame the victim for bringing it on themselves, but self protection and denial that it could have been me.

Don't get me wrong, we all do it to some extent, but the truly rational thing to do is try and stand in another's shoes who doesn't engage in the behaviour at all, and think about how they would see it - ie try and be as objective as possible.

There is a certain chance that any of us could be killed in a traffic accident, but it's complete folly to think that it only happens to other people because of reasons A, B, C etc. Plenty of people are killed on the roads who equally thought they were low risk, safe, defensive drivers .....

 

[redbruce]

This is interesting, and (please don't get your back up) but somewhat ironic.

As I'm sure you are aware, motorcyclists are exposed to around 20 times the risk of a car driver for fatality on a per km basis. Now I agree with what you said, that in order to accept that kind of risk increase, motorcyclists are underplaying that risk or rationalising it.

The most common form of rationalisation I've seen of that very question, is that the motorcyclists that are killed, are poorly skilled, risky riders, speeders, an accident waiting to happen etc. so as soon as I read what you wrote that's what I thought of, and the very next paragraph goes into a bunch of examples of how other motorcyclists (ie NOT redbruce) are dangerous.

This is a very common human error in risk judgement - it's a typical response to it won't happen to me because........ It's very much part of the blame the victim syndrome - the crux of it isn't to blame the victim for bringing it on themselves, but self protection and denial that it could have been me.

Don't get me wrong, we all do it to some extent, but the truly rational thing to do is try and stand in another's shoes who doesn't engage in the behaviour at all, and think about how they would see it - ie try and be as objective as possible.

There is a certain chance that any of us could be killed in a traffic accident, but it's complete folly to think that it only happens to other people because of reasons A, B, C etc. Plenty of people are killed on the roads who equally thought they were low risk, safe, defensive drivers .....

Completely agree.

You can only control what you can control. That's basically only yourself.

Until recently it was only me on the bike I had to worry about. Now my son has got one as well.

Thankfully he is much more sensible than I was at his age (21), however, we are all subject to the mood of the moment and the things we couldn't reasonably predict or adequately manage. On a bike there is no where to hide, you are vulnerable.

After 40 years of listening to my mother's plea to give up motorcycles, I'm now living with her concerns.

 

[hazza6542]

Completely agree.

You can only control what you can control. That's basically only yourself.

Until recently it was only me on the bike I had to worry about. Now my son has got one as well.

Thankfully he is much more sensible than I was at his age (21), however, we are all subject to the mood of the moment and the things we couldn't reasonably predict or adequately manage. On a bike there is no where to hide, you are vulnerable.

After 40 years of listening to my mother's plea to give up motorcycles, I'm now living with her concerns.

Ohhh if you thought I was bad, my brothers motorbike/license story is much, much worse. The flak I'm getting for a 10 over isn't close to 3 25 overs in a week. One was definitely over 25, uhhh, a lot over 25. He's a lot worse than he thinks when it comes to driving. Written off three cars and this is his third time losing his license. He done goofed a lot. Admittedly, one of them was just silly but his driving record kind of just makes you ignore it.

 

[floody]

There's a bloke who sounds like a perfect recipient in a government supplied sneakers/bus passes/bicycle scheme.

 

[foxpuppet]

Ohhh if you thought I was bad, my brothers motorbike/license story is much, much worse. The flak I'm getting for a 10 over isn't close to 3 25 overs in a week. One was definitely over 25, uhhh, a lot over 25. He's a lot worse than he thinks when it comes to driving. Written off three cars and this is his third time losing his license. He done goofed a lot. Admittedly, one of them was just silly but his driving record kind of just makes you ignore it.

Do you mind if ask, what was your parents driving record like as you were growing up?

 

[hazza6542]

Do you mind if ask, what was your parents driving record like as you were growing up?

Mum has a good record, terrible driver. Dad never lost his license but had his fair share of warnings. Great driver, knows what he's doing but I think that's mostly down to years of driving and a lot of time on a couch watching dtm.

Floody don't go making comments like that about people. Judge his driving, sure, but comments like that are just unnecessary.

 

[wesdadude]

As evidenced by that video the biggest reason to obey is the speed limits are other people. They will still make mistakes regardless of how much of a superstar you may be. Being attentive is not a substitute for obeying the limits in the same way a safe speed isn't a substitute for attentiveness. I don't know why motorcyclists want to go so quick, other people are morons and there's a lot less crash protection on a motorcycle.


It's laughable that people with such contempt for the speed limit signs expect others to righteously obey the keep left ones. The right lane is for overtaking (which should be performed within the limit), it's not "keep left unless speeding".


You may think the limit's set too low but it's about maintaining uniformity. Speed differential is dangerous. Uniformity allows for maintaining safe following distance and not having to worry about getting out of the way of the fuckwits.


It's not hard to maintain a safe speed, especially on the highway, the faster you go the harder it is to accelerate. Just glance at your speedo (or your tach, it will allow you to gage finer variations) in the same way you do your mirrors (you are regularly checking your mirrors, right?). There's nothing complex to throttle control. If you cover the brake with your foot and then roll it over so your toes are over the accelerator but your heel's still in the same place you can get much better weight control.

Please note, I don't condone sitting in front of a speeder to block them off, if there's a safe gap in the left lane I'll be in it. Otherwise, fuck them.

 

[billymtb]

As evidenced by that video the biggest reason to obey is the speed limits are other people. They will still make mistakes regardless of how much of a superstar you may be. Being attentive is not a substitute for obeying the limits in the same way a safe speed isn't a substitute for attentiveness. I don't know why motorcyclists want to go so quick, other people are morons and there's a lot less crash protection on a motorcycle.


It's laughable that people with such contempt for the speed limit signs expect others to righteously obey the keep left ones. The right lane is for overtaking (which should be performed within the limit), it's not "keep left unless speeding".


You may think the limit's set too low but it's about maintaining uniformity. Speed differential is dangerous. Uniformity allows for maintaining safe following distance and not having to worry about getting out of the way of the fuckwits.


It's not hard to maintain a safe speed, especially on the highway, the faster you go the harder it is to accelerate. Just glance at your speedo (or your tach, it will allow you to gage finer variations) in the same way you do your mirrors (you are regularly checking your mirrors, right?). There's nothing complex to throttle control. If you cover the brake with your foot and then roll it over so your toes are over the accelerator but your heel's still in the same place you can get much better weight control.

Please note, I don't condone sitting in front of a speeder to block them off, if there's a safe gap in the left lane I'll be in it. Otherwise, fuck them.

Great post, agree with everything.

Another thing that's interesting is that I asked my brother the biggest thing he learnt from taking a protective driver's course that he could apply to everyday driving. He said he was very surprised at how much room you actually need between cars in the case of an emergency and that nearly everyone underestimates it.

 

[floody]

You know Johnny, I do know better. There's no point carrying on with this.

 

[johnny]

"begs the question"?

C'mon floodster, surely you know better than that.

 

[redbruce]

As evidenced by that video the biggest reason to obey is the speed limits are other people. They will still make mistakes regardless of how much of a superstar you may be. Being attentive is not a substitute for obeying the limits in the same way a safe speed isn't a substitute for attentiveness. I don't know why motorcyclists want to go so quick, other people are morons and there's a lot less crash protection on a motorcycle.


It's laughable that people with such contempt for the speed limit signs expect others to righteously obey the keep left ones. The right lane is for overtaking (which should be performed within the limit), it's not "keep left unless speeding".


You may think the limit's set too low but it's about maintaining uniformity. Speed differential is dangerous. Uniformity allows for maintaining safe following distance and not having to worry about getting out of the way of the fuckwits.


It's not hard to maintain a safe speed, especially on the highway, the faster you go the harder it is to accelerate. Just glance at your speedo (or your tach, it will allow you to gage finer variations) in the same way you do your mirrors (you are regularly checking your mirrors, right?). There's nothing complex to throttle control. If you cover the brake with your foot and then roll it over so your toes are over the accelerator but your heel's still in the same place you can get much better weight control.

Please note, I don't condone sitting in front of a speeder to block them off, if there's a safe gap in the left lane I'll be in it. Otherwise, fuck them.

Pretty much agree with this also.

For a given situation being in a car and on a bike have significantly different risk profiles. As Pharma pointed out, we are at something like 20 times the risk of a car driver. I would reckon my level of attention is an order of magnitude more than when driving the car, to manage the risk to anywhere near the same level.

Even at the speed limit on a bike , a car cutting you off will generally end worse for the rider. The ability to minimize the negative outcome is definitely affected by speed, all other things being equal.

 

[hifiandmtb]

The fact that it's legal to ride a motorbike is weird.

Imagine if they never existed until now & someone wanted to legalise them. There'd be no way in hell it would ever happen.

 

[tasty.dirt74]

I'll get out the way when I feel like it,

I CBF reading the rest of the thread after reading this..

That is not really the attitude to have when in "control" of a motor vehicle.. Keep left unless overtaking.. its pretty simple.