I'm a grave menace to society

[Albino]

Do your part, stop speeding and really piss off all those coppers who can't get quota, which then flows uphill to his/her bosses, then to his/her bosses, then to his/her bosses etc etc...

No.

The result of this situation would be the bosses scratching their heads trying to work out why people are still dying but no one is speeding.

Their answer will be that the speed limit is too high.

[MSTRS:Me]

No.

The result of this situation would be the bosses scratching their heads trying to work out why people are still dying but no one is speeding.

Their answer will be that the speed limit is too high.

DING DONG
That, my friends, is the ring of truth...

[scumdog]

DING DONG
That, my friends, is the ring of truth...

The speed limits too high????

THAT'S the ring of truth??

[Patrick]

but no one is speeding.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa aaaa.......

Like that is EVER going to happen......

[riffer]

On the other hand Patrick, do you honestly think that the current emphasis on strict enforcement of the speed limit is going to bring down the road toll in the absence of any other factors?

[spudchucka]

On the other hand Patrick, do you honestly think that the current emphasis on strict enforcement of the speed limit is going to bring down the road toll in the absence of any other factors?

Personally I think it only makes a slight difference. But on the other hand I'm quite satisfied that relaxing it will result in an increase in the toll.

[scumdog]

Personally I think it only makes a slight difference. But on the other hand I'm quite satisfied that relaxing it will result in an increase in the toll.

What Spuddie sez.

Look at only a few years ago when you had to go more than 20k over the limit to get a ticket - 'everybody' cribbed on that and sat at about 123 to 125kph. (or 70-75 in town)

And 73kph around town is generally waaay to much - but people still moaned "Aw man, I was only doing 73 you say? C'mon, can you just warn me?".

[Mekk]

And 73kph around town is generally waaay to much - but people still moaned "Aw man, I was only doing 73 you say? C'mon, can you just warn me?".

Give people room to bend rules and they'll break them.

People are going to bitch about anything and everything all the time. Even if there were no limit, they'd find something else.

They want to be safe on the road but they don't want to be watched. They want security without involvement. Maintenance without delays, rainbows without rain, money without work etc.

They want rules that don't apply to them, just for other people. In all honesty, it's not worth pleasing some people.

[swbarnett]

In all honesty, it's not worth pleasing some people.

It's not about pleasing people. It's about the fact that probably the vast majority of society consider that the rigid enforcement of speed limits does nothing for the stated aim of reducing the road toll.

[scumdog]

It's not about pleasing people. It's about the fact that probably the vast majority of society consider that the rigid enforcement of speed limits does nothing for the stated aim of reducing the road toll.

Riiiiight....so it's about filling Govt coffers from the pockets of losers who can't keep under the limit eh?

[swbarnett]

Riiiiight....so it's about filling Govt coffers from the pockets of losers who can't keep under the limit eh?

Realistically it could be one of two things. Either it's about revenue gathering or there is a chance that the law makers actually believe rigid adherence to a speed limit improves public safety. Personally I think the former is more likely as I don't think politicians are that stupid.

[Patrick]

It is so simple... The "limit" is 100... not 101, not 193... the signs are there to remind those who "forget."

Speed all you like, you know the rules, take the risks... make your donations to the Govt as often as you like, who really cares?

Speed does kill, I've picked up enough splattered brains and torn limbs to prove it. Some might have been drunk, some were shit drivers, and any combination makes a wipeout more likely, but speed is a factor.

So does shit driving and if we see it we deal to it... or if you complain about it, we will deal to it too... same with speed, if we see it, we deal to it. Your choice. Its your money.....

Uncle Helen loves ya.

[spudchucka]

Personally I think the former is more likely as I don't think politicians are that stupid.

Ever listened to question time on national radio? They ARE stupid and incredibly childish too.

[Mekk]

It's not about pleasing people. It's about the fact that probably the vast majority of society consider that the rigid enforcement of speed limits does nothing for the stated aim of reducing the road toll.

If you don't have rigid adherence, you may as well not have a limit at all. As I said before, give people room to bend the rules and they will break them. Besides, the fact that a tolerance exists suggests non-rigid adherence. Yet people still push it.

They had to change the rather generous tolerance of 20km/h because as scumdog said, people would STILL break that and look for lenience.

Again, people want rules without applying them to themselves because they're such amazing drivers.

Another thing, if it were revenue gathering, why even have a tolerance?

[Edbear]

Another thing, if it were revenue gathering, why even have a tolerance?