Mounted average-speed cameras on motorways

**jrandom** · 23rd January 2008, 09:03

Originally Posted by Pixie

Result:More revenue for less legal hassle.

The overall impact of the changes was to increase demerit points and decrease fine amounts, which I heartily approve of. Better to give people a wakeup call by taking them off the road temporarily than to simply chip away at their bank accounts.

But one fine amount gets increased slightly, and of course the unwashed masses bellow "conspiracy!"

Gimme a break.

You really think people will be less likely to contest tickets that result in them losing their licences than tickets which just cost them a few hundred dollars but let them keep driving?

Your argument holds no water whatsoever.

**swbarnett** · 23rd January 2008, 09:36

Originally Posted by jrandom

You really think people will be less likely to contest tickets that result in them losing their licences than tickets which just cost them a few hundred dollars but let them keep driving?

It's not about whether people will be less likely to contest the ticket. If it is revenue they are after they'll just issue fewer of the higher tickets with legal hassle and more of the lower ones.

**DingoZ** · 24th January 2008, 00:00

Originally Posted by jrandom

The overall impact of the changes was to increase demerit points and decrease fine amounts, which I heartily approve of. Better to give people a wakeup call by taking them off the road temporarily than to simply chip away at their bank accounts.

But one fine amount gets increased slightly, and of course the unwashed masses bellow "conspiracy!"

Gimme a break.

You really think people will be less likely to contest tickets that result in them losing their licences than tickets which just cost them a few hundred dollars but let them keep driving?

Your argument holds no water whatsoever.

Well said

**The Pastor** · 24th January 2008, 08:32

75 demerits for one offence is bullshit. Owning a radar dector and get caught speeding (say 120-130) = 100 demerits.

bollox.

**onearmedbandit** · 24th January 2008, 08:46

Originally Posted by Monsterbishi

There's currently two of the new generation pole mounted cameras(can mount on any pole thicker than 63mm) which have average speed capabilities being tested down here in chch.

Really? Where would they be?

**90s** · 29th January 2008, 11:52

Originally Posted by jrandom

I hang out on uk.rec.motorcycles; I know what the UK motorway speed cameras are and how they work.

I used to do 40,000 miles per year in the UK at one point, and still drive over there every year. Sadly I am familiar with all their current tools, although registering for the London congestion charge gubbins catches me out every time. The average speed cameras didnot work well for bikes, and did fail to catch lane changers over distance, but no longer. Neither bikes nor those that change lanes are safe from the latest versions.

Originally Posted by jrandom

So... do you think that the motorway speed limits in the UK are too low, then?

Depends - certainly West Midlands police do with their officially unofficial acceptance of 85mph as acceptable for cars on the motorway. And this is the speed usually done in most moving conditions. Not 70mph. Certainly the last few police cheifs for road safetey have ALL been done for speeding, proving that they too think 70mph is too low in 'safe' conditions.
And me? I drive to the conditions. In the UK. Here I do 100kph. Driving in France last July I moved at 145kph with the other traffic on the peages and it was probably the safest traffic I have been in.

Originally Posted by jrandom

Or do you think that there should be no speed limits whatsoever? Or do you think that speed limits should just be a 'suggestion'? Just wondering.

Drive to the conditions. In the UK the limit is now often changing with the conditions (in theory), hence the point about people being confused. There is often a lag between 70mph being correct for the conditions and that the central traffic management system is broadcasting a 40mph temp. limit and timiing you = fining you = people braking like crazy for no raod related reason.

Originally Posted by jrandom

I mean, really. They're just motorways. They feel about the same at 100kph and 140kph. Your scheduling would have to be pretty fucked up for an extra 10mph to be crucial in every trip you take, and you have to be a pretty bad driver if you can't control your speed without becoming distracted from what's going on around you.

Haulage is pretty crazy. Minutes added up over a fleet over a year = billions of pounds at stake. For drivers on contract they must make the times for their pay but the companies cut them loose sacking drivers who speed. But a trucker caught in a jam must not loose his licence by speeding to make time up later or not speed and miss his targets. Its a fun world.

And see above for the distraction thing.

Originally Posted by jrandom

If your government really wanted to tax vehicle users, they'd just tax vehicle users. It wouldn't be hard.

They do, and fuel, and registration and and and. But there is a limit. But it is just not about govt collecting one amount - revenue is used by different groups, ie. police. To increase their budget they can raise their own revenue, and it is a local vs. central dynamic.

As an example of this and in contrast to the midlands police, the Scottish border police are hardline 70mph enforcers. They have raised revenue by hidinh cameras at the end of long downhills and places where speed creeps up to collect revenue. The ombudsman has fined them many times for doing this, but their statements confirm that the fines are less than the revenues collected ie. net gain. Govt won't increase their funding so ...

Originally Posted by jrandom

Now, maybe those people are wrong, but I'm pretty bored with the endless ranting from the unwashed masses about 'revenue gathering'.

I agree with you that many behind the road management schemes have safety first. Cameras too can work - at accident black spots and in urban areas studies have shown they are effective. Studies have proved that they are only effective when highly visible and advertised - ie. not hidden. Does not work - ever. But does raise cash.
And the problem is that once allowed you have groups who can subvert the use of the technology for political, financial and other gain. The UK is a sad case where in some areas the tools are used for road safety and seem to work. And other where they are blatantly used for revenue collection.

Never be bored when small groups use something that should work for you against you.

Back to the topic, average speed cameras are like all technology that aims to enforce behavioural change in people. If the education is not there in the first place, will not work. I think in NZ, it will not work.
Go back to driver education first and then see that people regulate their own driving and speed using the most sophisticated computer and software there is - the (drum roll please) brain.

**Bikernereid** · 29th January 2008, 12:21

Just cos you hang out on a site doesnlt mean you know how thing work in the UK. Have you ever riden/driven here and for how long?

Originally Posted by jrandom

I hang out on uk.rec.motorcycles; I know what the UK motorway speed cameras are and how they work.

So... do you think that the motorway speed limits in the UK are too low, then?

It is not an issue of the speed limit per se, although the German autobahns have the right idea and have less accidents, but it is rediculous and dangerous to keep changing the speed limit over a busy stretch of motoway for no particular hazardous reason.

Or do you think that there should be no speed limits whatsoever?

Speed limits have thir place, such as in towns, near school and on dangerous stretches of roads.

Or do you think that speed limits should just be a 'suggestion'?

Speed limits should not be sugestions otherwise you have people driving at all manner of speed limits which is not safe.

Just wondering.

Your scheduling would have to be pretty fucked up for an extra 10mph to be crucial in every trip you take, and you have to be a pretty bad driver if you can't control your speed without becoming distracted from what's going on around you.

You come and drive over here and see what it is like before spouting about peoples' driving capapbilities.

If your government really wanted to tax vehicle users, they'd just tax vehicle users. It wouldn't be hard.

They do tax us with road tax, fuel and the first 6 months of the gov't imposing speed restrictions on the M25 they earned over £6 million in revenue from speeding tickets. Also if you knew anything about North Wales you would lqlwo know of the reputation of the Chief of Police and his attitude to speed and motorbikes. he is the most hate Chief in the whole of the UK and has earned a fortune in speeding tickets much to the detriment of the tourism industry!!

It'd certainly involve a lot less cost and stuffing around than buying shitloads of cameras and waiting for people to drive past them above a certain speed. I'm not a fan of the 'revenue collection' theories. The people deciding to spend money on speed cameras genuinely think that less people will die on the roads and less expensive property damage will occur as a result of those systems.

Now, maybe those people are wrong, but I'm pretty bored with the endless ranting from the unwashed masses about 'revenue gathering'.

**Soul.Trader** · 29th January 2008, 16:02

Originally Posted by Coyote

But there are entrapment laws right? Something like you must see the car from 100m away? Bugger all distance when going 100km, only got 3 seconds to slow down

No. Firstly, that's not what entrapment is. Secondly, there's absolutely no reason they would have to warn you that they're about to snap you speeding.

**Max Preload** · 30th January 2008, 23:09

Originally Posted by Swoop

...night time allows the loons to lose control and crash - which is recorded on the observation cameras anyway!

Nothing on the Auckland motorway cameras is recorded - it's a live feed only.

**Swoop** · 31st January 2008, 09:01

Originally Posted by awful-truth

Nothing on the Auckland motorway cameras is recorded - it's a live feed only.

There have been several pieces of footage shown on television programmes, "Motorway Patrol" being one of them. Footage from CCTV cameras was used.
How did this happen if they are not recording?