speed/red light camera's

[big kev]

hey guys have a look at at the RTA site please and have a read of the content , New safety cameras are being introduced to make intersections safer by enforcing both speeding and red-light offences. http://163.189.217.150/roadsafety/speeda...tycameras/

Safety cameras use digital technology that is capable of detecting both red-light and speeding offences and will be replacing the current outdated wet-film red-light cameras that began operating in 1988. Safety cameras will be installed at 200 locations over four years.

The purpose of safety cameras is to reduce the number of crashes at traffic lights.

Crashes that result from drivers running red-lights can be particularly severe because they often involve the front of a vehicle impacting with the side doors of another vehicle. Passengers and drivers are not as well protected from side impacts as frontal impacts.

Evaluations of camera enforcement of red-light offences conducted in Australia and overseas have shown this type of enforcement is clearly effective in reducing casualty crashes at intersections. When the evaluations were considered together it is estimated that camera enforcement of red-light offences reduces the number of casualty crashes at intersections by around 30 per cent.

Speeding increases the risk of a crash and the severity of the crash outcome, the risk of causing death or injury in an urban 60km/h speed zone increases rapidly even with relatively small increases in speed. Speeding through an intersection is an extremely risky behaviour and puts other road users at risk.

The use of cameras to enforce speeding has proven road safety benefits. An independent evaluation of the NSW fixed speed camera program found that at sites where speed cameras have been installed there has been a 70 per cent reduction in speeding resulting in a 90 per cent decline in fatalities and a 23 per cent reduction in injuries.

Safety cameras will be installed at sites which meet specific criteria. These criteria are based on the number of crashes and cost to the community of crashes at a location. This ensures safety cameras are installed at intersections that need them most. The addition of speed enforcement will provide an additional road safety benefit at the camera location.
There will be no new offences or penalties for speeding, running a red-light or speeding through a red-light. Drivers who commit a red-light or red arrow offence will receive the current penalties for these offences. Drivers who commit a speeding offence will receive the relevant speeding penalty.
All intersections with safety cameras installed will be signposted with the new safety camera sign.

[TempOzzy]

These were introduced in SA a few years ago. I believe all our fixed intersection cameras are this type here now. We apparently have less cameras than intersections set up for them, so they get rotated around. You just don't know if the camera box is empty or not as you drive past.

[Greeny_SA]

These were introduced in SA a few years ago. I believe all our fixed intersection cameras are this type here now. We apparently have less cameras than intersections set up for them, so they get rotated around. You just don't know if the camera box is empty or not as you drive past.

They are not safety camera's at all ,they are revenue raising camera's.They don't give a shit about our safety, just want our money.

[Louwai]

This was a letter to the Editor from an ex policeman, published in the Gold Coast Sun newspaper.

Quote:
ONCE again we witnessed the horrific death toll on our roads over the Christmas period.

As an ex-trafic police officer I ask myself 'when are the politicians and bureaucrats going to realise that all their band-aid treatments have been a total failure?'

Their ideas seem to be more directed at detection and punishment of offenders rather than prevention.

Drivers cause collisions; there are no accidents. They run off roads, hit trees, lose control of their vehicles etc.

Speed, drink, drugs or whatever are secondary to the cause ... important symptoms but not the cause.

No one should be able to teach a person to drive other than a licensed driving instructor, qualified to teach a common system of safe driving (recommend the system used in police driver training.)

We should develop regional training centres equipped with a skid pan, driving simulators and eye-testing facilities to include tests to detect colour blindness.

Examination for a driving licence must be more comprehensive and should include driving at speeds up to 110 km/h, night-driving in poor weather conditions on country roads and on freeways.

Once passed as competent, L and P plates should be abolished.

The second stage of driver education should be through the courts, where instead of a tap on the wrist or paltry fine, traffic offenders may be fined and sentenced to special training at the offender's cost. [I think this may happen in some states in the USA, according to an episode of Malcolm in the Middle I saw recently.]

In cases of drink-driving, why is it necessary to even have a court case with all the associated cost and time consuming trials? If a perosn is deemed over the limit as a result of tests - straight to jail.

The community can no longer keep bearing the ever increasing cost of road trauma.

We have reached the time for some thinking beyond the square and it is high time the decision makers faced the fact that, so far, they have failed miserably to make any progress in solving the problems.
- PETER BROOKE, Mudgeeraba

End of quote.

Seems he has the same belief that I do. TEACH people correctly in the first place.

[Greeny_SA]

This was a letter to the Editor from an ex policeman, published in the Gold Coast Sun newspaper.

Quote:
ONCE again we witnessed the horrific death toll on our roads over the Christmas period.

As an ex-trafic police officer I ask myself 'when are the politicians and bureaucrats going to realise that all their band-aid treatments have been a total failure?'

Their ideas seem to be more directed at detection and punishment of offenders rather than prevention.

Drivers cause collisions; there are no accidents. They run off roads, hit trees, lose control of their vehicles etc.

Speed, drink, drugs or whatever are secondary to the cause ... important symptoms but not the cause.

No one should be able to teach a person to drive other than a licensed driving instructor, qualified to teach a common system of safe driving (recommend the system used in police driver training.)

We should develop regional training centres equipped with a skid pan, driving simulators and eye-testing facilities to include tests to detect colour blindness.

Examination for a driving licence must be more comprehensive and should include driving at speeds up to 110 km/h, night-driving in poor weather conditions on country roads and on freeways.

Once passed as competent, L and P plates should be abolished.

The second stage of driver education should be through the courts, where instead of a tap on the wrist or paltry fine, traffic offenders may be fined and sentenced to special training at the offender's cost. [I think this may happen in some states in the USA, according to an episode of Malcolm in the Middle I saw recently.]

In cases of drink-driving, why is it necessary to even have a court case with all the associated cost and time consuming trials? If a perosn is deemed over the limit as a result of tests - straight to jail.

The community can no longer keep bearing the ever increasing cost of road trauma.

We have reached the time for some thinking beyond the square and it is high time the decision makers faced the fact that, so far, they have failed miserably to make any progress in solving the problems.
- PETER BROOKE, Mudgeeraba

End of quote.

Seems he has the same belief that I do. TEACH people correctly in the first place.

Ive been saying that for year's. There are to many people in this country with driver's licenses, who couldn't drive a pea up a duck's arse with a 12 inch rubber mallet .The licenses may as well have come of the back of a cornflakes box . We get people in the hill's who can just maintain control at 40km/hr on an 80 km/hr road,& they cause impatient people to take risk's to pass them. The cop's should get them off our road's , but our govt has them all tied up making money for pollie's Free Moe/crayfish lunch's.We have also paid enough fuel tax to have a duel 6 lane highway all the way round the country with barrier's separating up & back traffic. No head on's.As I said earlier the govt don't give a rat's arse how many of us kill ourselves on the inadequate shitty road's, they just want our money.Now that I've vented my spleen, I'll shut up .

[rjw3105]

This was a letter to the Editor from an ex policeman, published in the Gold Coast Sun newspaper.

Quote:
ONCE again we witnessed the horrific death toll on our roads over the Christmas period.

As an ex-trafic police officer I ask myself 'when are the politicians and bureaucrats going to realise that all their band-aid treatments have been a total failure?'

Their ideas seem to be more directed at detection and punishment of offenders rather than prevention.

Drivers cause collisions; there are no accidents. They run off roads, hit trees, lose control of their vehicles etc.

Speed, drink, drugs or whatever are secondary to the cause ... important symptoms but not the cause.

No one should be able to teach a person to drive other than a licensed driving instructor, qualified to teach a common system of safe driving (recommend the system used in police driver training.)

We should develop regional training centres equipped with a skid pan, driving simulators and eye-testing facilities to include tests to detect colour blindness.

Examination for a driving licence must be more comprehensive and should include driving at speeds up to 110 km/h, night-driving in poor weather conditions on country roads and on freeways.

Once passed as competent, L and P plates should be abolished.

The second stage of driver education should be through the courts, where instead of a tap on the wrist or paltry fine, traffic offenders may be fined and sentenced to special training at the offender's cost. [I think this may happen in some states in the USA, according to an episode of Malcolm in the Middle I saw recently.]

In cases of drink-driving, why is it necessary to even have a court case with all the associated cost and time consuming trials? If a perosn is deemed over the limit as a result of tests - straight to jail.

The community can no longer keep bearing the ever increasing cost of road trauma.

We have reached the time for some thinking beyond the square and it is high time the decision makers faced the fact that, so far, they have failed miserably to make any progress in solving the problems.
- PETER BROOKE, Mudgeeraba

End of quote.

Seems he has the same belief that I do. TEACH people correctly in the first place.

I think I know why he's an X-copper. Common sense and a real understanding of the problem.
That will never happen!!!!!!!

[Throwdown!]

If they want to raise revenue and increase road safety, they should do a basic re-test of everyone annually as a part of the rego. Cover the computer test plus one aspect of practical driving mentioned above such as night driving, motorway driving or on a skid pan (a simulator should be up to the task).

Charge everyone $80 and take the pressure off of Officers policing the roads for cash collecting instead of safety. Once everyone drives better, we could also have varied speed limits so the M4, as an example, could be 60km speed limit during rush hour and 130km speed limit after 11.00pm. That way, when I get a ticket for 120km at 10.30pm I'll know it's actually deserved.

[keno77]

i reckon they should do what they do in thailand- they have a countdown for the number of seconds until the light changes for both red and green. nobody runs reds because they know the other traffic is going to take off at zero seconds. also good because all the bikes (scooters?!) are lined up at the front (sides?!) with brakes on, revs up, ready to launch. very amusing to watch.