"Speed police can't hide"

[StoneChucker]

Dominion Post, 19/10/04

(I was going to type it out word for word, but I have to get back to work, so here's a concise version.)

Police officers can no linger hide in bushes, or camouflage themselves in order to catch speeding drivers.
Police bosses have issued a tough new speed enforcement guide. The move follows the deployment of mobile speed cameras, an increase in the number of speeding fines issued and a spate of negative publicity on the lengths police were going to catch speedsters.

Key point: Police vehicles or officers' uniforms may not be hidden. All speed measuring devices are to be employed in an overt manner. The only exception is unmarked police vehicles used for speed enforcement.

Dom post revealed in April, 14 unmarked police cars are being rotated around the country to target dangerous drivers. guidelines also spell out how discretion should be applied. Other then in exceptional circumstances, anyone driving 11km/h over the limit, or 6km/h in heavy vehicles, will be ticketed. Drivers not exceeding these limits should not be ticketed unless their speed poses a risk to public safety.

Just FYI :)

[rodgerd]

Key point: Police vehicles or officers' uniforms may not be hidden. All speed measuring devices are to be employed in an overt manner. The only exception is unmarked police vehicles used for speed enforcement.


Good. If the point is deterrence, visibility of the cops does more to deter than lurking in bushes.



guidelines also spell out how discretion should be applied. Other then in exceptional circumstances, anyone driving 11km/h over the limit, or 6km/h in heavy vehicles, will be ticketed. Drivers not exceeding these limits should not be ticketed unless their speed poses a risk to public safety.


Yeah, and we'll still hear the bleating from the "111 is only 1 km/h over, where's the discretion!?" crowd...

[Pwalo]

Good. If the point is deterrence, visibility of the cops does more to deter than lurking in bushes.

Couldn't agree more. Can't be a deterrent if you can't see them. There's nothing like seeing the boys in blue out on the roads to make you watch your driving.

Yeah, and we'll still hear the bleating from the "111 is only 1 km/h over, where's the discretion!?" crowd...

Yep, seems that 10km/h is a reasonable leeway, just have to watch those overtakes.

[FzerozeroT]

"hey officer, You weren't being overt, coming over the crest of that hill like that" think that'll work?

[The Pastor]

I though on overtaking you can go 120 (in a 100 zone)?


Does this mean if a cop is hiding and he tickets me I can say "you're not allowed to hide so you cant give me a ticket" Or is it going to be "we're not allowed to hide but you're still going to get the ticket for being and arrogant son of gun"?

[Mr Skid]

I though on overtaking you can go 120 (in a 100 zone)?

:killingme :killingme :killingme

Can you report back to us your sucess with this though(t)?

[The Pastor]

Well, I don’t go over 100 so I don’t need to over take. But I thought the overtaking was 120, at least that’s what my driving instructor told me (I think)

[The Pastor]

And the fact is everyone travells at 110 so if your overtaking a car or bike thats doing 110 you're not goning to get very far, And often the room you have to overtake is not long enough for a slow overtake, Granted if they are going 110 you shouldn't need to overtake but I'm guessing thats not going to stop people.

[F5 Dave]

It is a pretty loose urban myth that 120 is ok for overtaking.

Problem is when you are following people, there is a cretin at the front who will do 80 or less, have a line of cars behind him & speed up when he gets to a passing lane so you have to REALLY break the law to get past, then slows right down when the lanes merge.

Cops are often seen at the end of over taking areas for this reason.

The psychology of this person in front is either they don’t feel safe driving faster on single lane roads & do when it gets straight & open, or more likely they have small penises & this is the only way they get to control others so they speed up to stop people passing & slow down when they can’t.

Drives people crazy, if everyone could do a consistent 100k on the open road then there would be a lot less crazy overtaking manoeuvres road rage & risk taking. & probably a lot less desire to speed to make up for lost time & frustration.

Don’t expect the LTSA to be pushing this idea in the near future . . .

Though they did surprise me with the ‘brake on the straight’ adds & more regular eyesight checks for oldies ideas (I really believe people should have to get their eyes checked more often to keep a licence) so am prepared for them to surprise me again by doing something sensible.

Bring it on.

[jrandom]

... if everyone could do a consistent 100k on the open road then there would be a lot less crazy overtaking manoeuvres road rage & risk taking.

I have personally observed on longish cage drives that, even taking into account my usual self-enforced 110kph ceiling, I am always travelling faster than everybody else on the road, bar the occasional Porsche, WRX, et cetera zipping into the distance.

Most drivers certainly average far less than 100kph on our open roads, even though many are quite driveable in a modern car at the speed limit.

I suspect that a driver education programme pushing a philosophy of concentration and attention to vehicle control would result in a lessening of high-speed silliness by frustrated would-be passers; the median speed would creep toward the actual open-road limit as drivers abrogated their need to stay 20-30kph under it while they drank their Diet Coke, twiddled with the volume on their Dire Straits albums and handed chewy alligator lollies to the toddlers in the back.

[Edit: Mmmm. Chewy alligator lollies...]

[rodgerd]

Though they did surprise me with the ‘brake on the straight’ adds & more regular eyesight checks for oldies ideas (I really believe people should have to get their eyes checked more often to keep a licence) so am prepared for them to surprise me again by doing something sensible.


Sadly, among Harry Ds more sensible ideas is that he's bowing to the almighty voting power of the oldies in this area. Despite the fact that crashes and fatalities involving and caused by older drivers are spiraling up relative to other age groups, there are likely to be further, agressive roll-backs on mandatory retesting for elderly drivers and special licenses for within 10km of home, with relaxed test conditions/fitness applied (great comfort if you get killed by some half-blind moron, I'm sure, that they were within 10 km of home...)

[vifferman]

Sadly, among Harry Ds more sensible ideas is that he's bowing to the almighty voting power of the oldies in this area. Despite the fact that crashes and fatalities involving and caused by older drivers are spiraling up relative to other age groups, there are likely to be further, agressive roll-backs on mandatory retesting for elderly drivers and special licenses for within 10km of home, with relaxed test conditions/fitness applied (great comfort if you get killed by some half-blind moron, I'm sure, that they were within 10 km of home...)All part of the general malaise that views driving as a right, not as a privilege and serious responsibility.:spudwhat:

My mother drives OK (she's 74), but I reckon she'd be better off financially if she used taxis instead of owning a car.

[F5 Dave]

. . . albums and handed chewy alligator lollies to the toddlers in the back.

[Edit: Mmmm. Chewy alligator lollies...]


When I have kids they will never even find out there are such things as Chewy Alligator lollies.

I’ll just cough or say I’m chewing tobacco. :whistle: Little buggers would eat ‘em all, I’m sure.

[spudchucka]

I though on overtaking you can go 120 (in a 100 zone)?
Theres this thing, its called the road code. Ever seen it? Ever read it?

[spudchucka]

Key point: Police vehicles or officers' uniforms may not be hidden. All speed measuring devices are to be employed in an overt manner. The only exception is unmarked police vehicles used for speed enforcement.
I reckon its a good move. An overt presence is best as a deterant and it will help to shut the whingers up too.

[Kickaha]

and it will help to shut the whingers up too.

Would you like to place a small wager on that?

They'll just find something else to bitch about.

[sAsLEX]

Key point: Police vehicles or officers' uniforms may not be hidden. All speed measuring devices are to be employed in an overt manner. Drivers not exceeding these limits should not be ticketed unless their speed poses a risk to public safety.

Just FYI :)

I know i slowed down when I was flashed by the cop on the way back on sun, thing is by slowing down it greatly affected my concentration as dawdling along at 80kmh on the open road is just plain boring, after about 15 mins I had to stop for a break to recharge my slowly falling asleep mind.

[scumdog]

DON'T GET ME GOING!! They give me a job and then tell me I have to do it with one hand tied behind my back!! - do you guys that speed have big lights flashing and flags flying to let the Police know they're coming?

This is not a school-yard people!! 'pax' and 'nibs' don't work!! It's lives we are dealing with.

Why should there be any quarter given to those that break the rules when they 'see' a cop but go like hell when they don't?

BTW I've had a couple of rums - and Mrs SD showed me how to move my message to this thread from the one I originally posted on ( I knew there was a reason I married her!!) :niceone:

[MikeL]

I reckon its a good move. An overt presence is best as a deterant and it will help to shut the whingers up too.

So does this mean that the whingers who complain about unreasonable or illogical police tactics might actually, sometimes, have a point? Or is shutting them up just an irrelevant spin-off? Is it ever possible to admit that you were wrong?

All rhetorical questions, btw...

[spudchucka]

Would you like to place a small wager on that?

They'll just find something else to bitch about.
I did say "help to shut them up", nothing other than a gag or a rope around their necks will do the job on many of them.

[spudchucka]

So does this mean that the whingers who complain about unreasonable or illogical police tactics might actually, sometimes, have a point? Or is shutting them up just an irrelevant spin-off? Is it ever possible to admit that you were wrong?

All rhetorical questions, btw...
Firstly, I don't think I've ever been overly outspoken on the issue of hiding in bushes etc. To me its a non-issue but I can see how it pisses folks off, good ridance to it.

Secondly, I'm not saying they don't have a point. What I'm saying is there are two sides to every coin and from the day I first visited this web site to see what it was all about I found an unbelievable one sided coin being tossed around by people who have little or no first hand knowledge of what the were bitching about.

If my arguements appear one sided then thats probably because I'm countering some pretty one sided views from the opposite camp.

Thirdly, I have no problem admitting if I'm clearly wrong about something.

[scumdog]

As a hunter I find it goes against the grain by NOT 'hiding', I mean would a duck hunter sit in the midle of a paddock dressed in red & yellow and expect to get many ducks?
If you are not speeding etc you do not have a worry, eh? if you ARE then it is more likely to slow you down if you thought an 'UNSEEN' cop could be nearby! :sly:

[MikeL]

If you are not speeding etc you do not have a worry, eh? if you ARE then it is more likely to slow you down if you thought an 'UNSEEN' cop could be nearby! :sly:

Well, on the one hand we have the theory that an overt presence is the best deterrent. On the other hand we have the theory that the possibility of an unseen cop is the best deterrent. Which is it to be?

C'mon guys, get your act together. Or just admit that it's smoke and mirrors, political expediency, whatever fashionable flavour of the month will advance some ambitious bureaucrat's career...

But don't be surprised if we remain cynical and a tad bitter. After all, we're paying for it.

[Skyryder]

As a hunter I find it goes against the grain by NOT 'hiding', I mean would a duck hunter sit in the midle of a paddock dressed in red & yellow and expect to get many ducks?
If you are not speeding etc you do not have a worry, eh? if you ARE then it is more likely to slow you down if you thought an 'UNSEEN' cop could be nearby! :sly:



We all know that on many occssions there are times when it is critical to keep focused on the road ahead. Hell we all ride bikes here and travelling at 100k's or there abouts and there are occsions that my attention stays on the road ahead. That's my priority not the speedo. I check the speedo when I consider the road and traffic allow me to do this safely. I recall reading somewhere there is a two second delay from the time you refocus on the speedo and then back on the road. In those two seconds if you misread the road conditions or the unexpected happens..................no need to go down that road if you will excuse the pun. Keep the undercover cops for serious crime and if you want to prevent speeding Be Seen.

Skyryder

[StoneChucker]

This is how I feel. If you are speeding, then if you get caught, tough. It doesn't matter how you were caught. Whether it was by a "overt" marked police car in the middle of the road, by a camouflaged (sp.?) cop lying under a bush or by a spotter plane overhead with a stopwatch (hahaha - previous thread), you were still speeding. I do however feel that having all cars and police being overt will in general slow down the cars/bikes on the road. When I see a police presence, I slow down, and I'm never, thats never exceeding 100km/h in my car, and not usually on my bike (I'm not perfect). It's just a natural reaction, slow down.

I personally don't have a problem with the fines, I never had one, but if I did, they can use the money for whatever they like. Now, don't get me wrong, I can't afford it, and would be cursing for months, but in the end, it IS "your" own doing.

And I can wholehartedly understand what Scumdog is saying about not being able to hide. The duck hunting analogy is spot on. I'm not btw, trying to favour either side, I'm just a neutral road user, who HAS read the road code ;)

[MikeL]

The duck hunting analogy is spot on.

Perhaps more so than you intended. We are sitting ducks, indeed. It's all a game. Some pay the price for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[What?]

Well, on the one hand we have the theory that an overt presence is the best deterrent. On the other hand we have the theory that the possibility of an unseen cop is the best deterrent. Which is it to be?
If unseen cops are a good deterent, how is it they catch so many "offenders"?




Hmmmm, might change my handle to Fisherman. :doh:

[rodgerd]

(Older drivers)


All part of the general malaise that views driving as a right, not as a privilege and serious responsibility.:spudwhat:


The bit that made me laugh was a quote about how resposible older drivers were, how they would hand in their licenses if they were concerned about being fit to drive, et al. Of course. That's why they were complaining about flunking mandatory re-testing, because they recognised they weren't fit to drive...

[rodgerd]

But don't be surprised if we remain cynical and a tad bitter. After all, we're paying for it.

The only people who are paying for it are the ones who keep breaking the law. Cynical? Pig-headed, more like.

[rodgerd]

I personally don't have a problem with the fines, I never had one, but if I did, they can use the money for whatever they like. Now, don't get me wrong, I can't afford it, and would be cursing for months, but in the end, it IS "your" own doing.


*applause*

[spudchucka]

It's all a game. Some pay the price for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
And some just play by the rules and never have a problem!

[Lou Girardin]

I particularly approve of the instruction to be lenient within 250 metres of a speed limit change, unless there is immediate risk to, say, roadworkers.
Now we can just look for coppers near the road, rather than 20 metres up a bank and behind bushes. It'll make SH16 a lot more relaxing.

[Kickaha]

This is how I feel. If you are speeding, then if you get caught, tough. It doesn't matter how you were caught. Whether it was by a "overt" marked police car in the middle of the road, by a camouflaged (sp.?) cop lying under a bush or by a spotter plane overhead with a stopwatch (hahaha - previous thread), you were still speeding




Stop being so responsible,don't you know you're meant to get caught and come on here and bleat and moan about getting a ticket, and how dare they when you're such a good driver and why don't they go catch some real criminals blah blah blah

[MikeL]

And some just play by the rules and never have a problem!

True. No matter how unfair or illogical they are, rules are rules and we mustn't think we can ever change anything by complaining. We should all just play the game, and accept that the People in Authority who made up the rules always know what's best for us.
Or at the very least, we shouldn't shout at the ref...

[scumdog]

True. No matter how unfair or illogical they are, rules are rules and we mustn't think we can ever change anything by complaining. We should all just play the game, and accept that the People in Authority who made up the rules always know what's best for us.
Or at the very least, we shouldn't shout at the ref...

Yeah, like tht's going to happen on THIS site eh Loe et al??? :moon:

I must ride/drive like an old woman going by my ticket record, (NO speeding and NO wheelies etc?) - yeah right :msn-wink:

[spudchucka]

True. No matter how unfair or illogical they are, rules are rules and we mustn't think we can ever change anything by complaining. We should all just play the game, and accept that the People in Authority who made up the rules always know what's best for us.
Or at the very least, we shouldn't shout at the ref...
Are your comments general or specific to this thread? As far as the road rules are concerned, you signed up to them when you applied for a drivers licence.