Victoria to hide Speed Cameras

[csv8]

POLICE say they are happy for drivers to flash their lights to warn other motorists about speed cameras.

Traffic Superintendent Dean McWhirter today said he was happy for motorists to flash their lights to warn other motorists they were approaching a speed camera.

"If that occurs I am comfortable with that because it means actually people are getting the message," Supt McWhirter said today.

[/B]
Supt McWhirter also defended rule changes, revealed in the Herald Sun today, which allow the hiding of speed cameras behind bushes and road signs.

"It was done to make sure that there was some protection in relation to the mobile speed camera operators," he said.

"To make sure the risk to them is mitigated.

"Unfortunately, what we know is that there have been a number of incidents where mobile speed camera vehicles have been swerved at.

"In the last 12 months there have been 247 incidents of threats in relation to mobile speed camera operators.

"And of those 247 incidents, 110 of those have been swerving at mobile speed cameras."

Supt McWhirter confirmed there would be occasions that operators would be concealed by bushes or signs to protect them.

"That's a commonsense approach," he said.

Police have changed laws that means mobile speed cameras can be hidden.

Police have changed laws that means mobile speed cameras can be hidden. Source: HeraldSun

The force policy used to say that "under no circumstances" were cameras to be concealed by any covert means.

It also used to ban them on downhill stretches of road unless the site had a significant speed-related crash record.

The new rules - effective immediately - permit mobile speed cameras to be hidden behind trees, bushes, posts and road signs to lessen the risk of harm to camera operators from angry motorists.

They also allow them to be used at the bottom of hills and on slopes if the "road safety objective" can't be achieved at an alternative location.

"There is no restriction from a technical, legislative or enforcement perspective on a mobile road safety camera being operated on a slope, hill or gradient," the new rules say.

The force spent months creating its new policy after the Herald Sun revealed some cameras were being hidden despite the ban and also that fines had to be scrapped because a camera was wrongly set up on a steep hill.

Almost 510,000 motorists paid more than $103 million in mobile speed camera fines in the past year.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law...-1226739895665

My comment : REVENUE Raising !!! nothing about road safety, at all..

[tex]

Poor Victorians.

We've had this covert camera regime in Tasmania for nearly 10 years!

Apparently the idea being it forces motorists to drive at the prescribed limit EVERYWHERE. It's much safer on Tassie roads ya know.

Increased consolidated revenue is just a bi product, and not taken into consideration with the covert initiative. That's what they tell us.

[SB076]

Government must need more money

[csv8]

Mods just noticed "Tell me that's not money making..." is same topic, can you merge/delete thanx

[zilo]

Cool...

every time the radar detector goes off I can now flash my lights

cause it means I get the road safety message...

[mik]

They also allow them to be used at the bottom of hills and on slopes if the "road safety objective" can't be achieved at an alternative location

let me transplant probably what it really means !

They also allow them to be used at the bottom of hills and on slopes if the "money making objective" can't be achieved at an alternative location

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by mik

They also allow them to be used at the bottom of hills and on slopes if the "road safety objective" can't be achieved at an alternative location

let me transplant probably what it really means !

They also allow them to be used at the bottom of hills and on slopes if the "money making objective" can't be achieved at an alternative location

Yes, I was trying to get my head around what they meant by "road safety objective". Your interpretation was the only thing I could think of.

Everyone's eyes will now be glued to the speedo when going down steeper hills as the car tries to accelerate, restrained by the constant adjustment of brake application to keep it at or below the speed limit. Is that really the safest way to drive?

[Trevor 57]

I have a fool proof way of beating this very under-handed sneaky money grabbing by the Government, I don't speed, those Government bastards are not having any of my hard earned cash

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I have a fool proof way of beating this very under-handed sneaky money grabbing by the Government, I don't speed, those Government bastards are not having any of my hard earned cash

i agree to a point. i haven't been caught speeding for 15+ years. probably just lucky.

the thing is, what is safer. allowing taffic to flow, or promote a mix of paranoid drivers driving 10 below, some driving at the limit, and others pushing the boundaries at 10+ over.

somewhere along the way, they have lost sight of what they are actually trying to achieve.

oh, and coppers hiding is nothing new. used to be the norm not that long ago.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by mik

They also allow them to be used at the bottom of hills and on slopes if the "road safety objective" can't be achieved at an alternative location

let me transplant probably what it really means !

They also allow them to be used at the bottom of hills and on slopes if the "money making objective" can't be achieved at an alternative location

When I read that, I automatically assumed that "Objective" = Raise money.



What a load of crap this is. It will allow cars to parade as work/construction vehicles with tradie gear in the back.


Why focus on grabbing the mum and dad's that occasionally creep over the limit.The fopcus needs to be on getting the mesaage across about actual dangerous driving.


Who's up for a non-violent protest on the Monash @ 30km/h? Say a week from now at about 7am?

[prydey]

Originally Posted by MAD

Who's up for a non-violent protest on the Monash @ 30km/h? Say a week from now at about 7am?

it might start out as 'non violent' but if you block a major arterial rd in peak hour, it won't end well, regardless of the cause.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by prydey

it might start out as 'non violent' but if you block a major arterial rd in peak hour, it won't end well, regardless of the cause.

You don't make a point by being nice.

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by MAD

You don't make a point by being nice.

Quite sure you won't be very happy when someone gives you a love tap on the rear in their prado for holding em up.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by Kable72

Quite sure you won't be very happy when someone gives you a love tap on the rear in their prado for holding em up.

Why would that bother me? Insurance will fix it and the Prado driver will be charged with failing to leave enough room to safely stop, or dangerous driving if the act is happened under acceleration.

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by MAD

Why would that bother me? Insurance will fix it and the Prado driver will be charged with failing to leave enough room to safely stop, or dangerous driving if the act is happened under acceleration.

Regardless if you're covered and the offender will be punished, once you pull over to exchange details I'd punch ya face and I would reckon the cars behind the prado might want their crack as well.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by Kable72

Regardless if you're covered and the offender will be punished, once you pull over to exchange details I'd punch ya face and I would reckon the cars behind the prado might want their crack as well.

So an assault charge on top of it. And potentially a hospital visit after "self defense".

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by MAD

So an assault charge on top of it. And potentially a hospital visit after "self defense".

You're not getting the point. It's only going to end in tears for everyone doing something like that. Peaceful protests won't **** anyone off to the point where road rage is going to take over.

[MAD]

Like I said, you don't make a point by being nice.

[jmack]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I have a fool proof way of beating this very under-handed sneaky money grabbing by the Government, I don't speed, those Government bastards are not having any of my hard earned cash

problem is if everyone did do the right thing and not get robbed,they would find another way to get the money out of us as they are factored into the budget before anyone is even fined.i dont know why car companies spend so much money on making their cars safer when all they had to do was what the gov does with speed cameras,just ask the gov they will tell u it speed cameras that save lives not sfer cars

[Uncle_Ken]

I remember when radar first came to AUST. I remember the Politicians and Police (all States and Territories) saying the words ‘Highly visible’ ‘not revenue raising’.

Hidden mobile makes no sense unless: * You live in an autocratic state and breaking any law is harshly punished ** You want to raise $$$ because every day we (the people) technically break any number of laws sometimes without even knowing (e.g. I’m looking to see if the traffic is clear to change lanes and my speed goes over the speed limit)

Hidden mobile cameras won’t stop people speeding until they nearly run out of points and drive UNDER the speed limit everywhere because they are worried about losing their licence. You could in theory be just over the limit (say 66 in a 60 zone) 3 times in 1 day. By the time the fines arrive you have already lost your licence becasue you don't know you have had you photo taken.

I hope they don’t use this logic start ‘hiding’ school zone warning lights and put cameras there.
Just my quick thoughts


UK

[Kable72]

Who's up for a non-violent protest on the Monash @ 30km/h? Say a week from now at about 7am?

This is not going to end non violently.

[Uncle_Ken]

Oh and wait and see the other States follow suit....
Uk

[MAD]

Originally Posted by Kable72

This is not going to end non violently.

You realise the description of 'non-violent' is from the view of the protesters, not the response.
You can't control people, you can only take a stand in a way that will get as much attention as possible while staying legal.

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by MAD

You realise the description of 'non-violent' is from the view of the protesters, not the response.
You can't control people, you can only take a stand in a way that will get as much attention as possible while staying legal.

Making a stand where you're aware that you will cause an aggressive reaction is just as guilty as those who take an aggressive action.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by Kable72

Making a stand where you're aware that you will cause an aggressive reaction is just as guilty as those who take an aggressive action.

This comment is in my top ten for ridiculous statements for this year, maybe even top 5.

What do you propose instead? A petting zoo? No good, I've seen mothers go mental at these. I guess that leaves bubble blowing at the park then.

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by MAD

This comment is in my top ten for ridiculous statements for this year, maybe even top 5.

What do you propose instead? A petting zoo? No good, I've seen mothers go mental at these. I guess that leaves bubble blowing at the park then.

So provoking someone into punching you holding up traffic on a major road isn't going to have someone look at you and your little "peaceful" possy?

[Trevor 57]

FAR TOO MUCH AGGRESSION IN HERE EVERYONE!!!!!

just don't speed, simple really, teach that ****en Government a lesson

[burnz]

you want to protest, then burn all the cameras.

that message will be loud and clear.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by Kable72

So provoking someone into punching you holding up traffic on a major road isn't going to have someone look at you and your little "peaceful" possy?

Well, the idea is to get attention, but it's not provoking or baiting, it's a protest. You don't seem to get that idea yet.

[2011G6E]

That "police OK with people flashing the lights" thing happened one christmas period here in Queensland. The police said they were happy with people doing it "if they saw someone they thought was driving too quickly". They said it was "proven" to slow people down for quite a while as they expected a hidden camera van somewhere up ahead.

Soon went back to being an offence again however, when they came to their senses and remembered they were supposed to be making money out of the enterprise and not slowing people down...

We have a two way in the Triton now and a handheld in the Celica. That way it makes it very easy to keep up with "road conditions" up ahead when on the highway...*cough*...

Oh, and "don't speed and you've got nothing to worry about"? Sure...keep telling yourself that and revelling in your supreme confidence in the absolute, 100%, complete and total accuracy of an electronic device sitting by the roadside operated by different operators in all sorts of environmental conditions...and forget the recent news story about how radar operators in one state (was it Victoria?) were using photoshop or something to add information onto the photo after getting it from the machine...I'm quite sure that would never happen in any other area...
This was the blowup in the corner of the photo fo what was apparently "our" Triton in my last speed camera ticket...you can't see the plate clearly at all in the big main image (but "a clearer image is used for assessment purposes...honest!"...). A conspiracy nut would ask why there's such a gap between the second and third letter...what letter is that anyway, an F? An R?, a P?...but I just trusted it must be our car and paid up...