Cash cameras
SA'S first fixed speed camera has been called a "cash cow" after nabbing the second-highest number of motorists.
Family First MP Robert Brokenshire says the Glover Ave camera's location - aimed at the down track of the Bakewell Underpass - is all about revenue raising and not road safety.
He fears the next eight fixed roadside cameras to be installed could also be positioned to maximise revenue instead of minimising road accidents.
The Glover Ave camera, which became operational on May 28, caught 7469 speeding vehicles in its first year of operation, according to the latest police figures.
Mr Brokenshire said there was no evidence the section of Glover Ave, where the fixed roadside camera is located, was a traffic accident black spot.
The site did not appear on a list of the top 10 black spots for 2008-10, which was obtained from the Transport Department by Mr Brokenshire under Freedom of Information laws.
He said only four of the 10 accident black spots correlated with the top speed camera sites.
Road Safety Minister Tom Kenyon yesterday said the Glover Ave camera was erected after a survey in 2008 showed 58 per cent of all traffic heading down into the underpass was travelling over the speed limit.
"My message to Mr Brokenshire and all drivers is simple: `If you don't want to get caught speeding, don't speed'."
More than enough evidence that speed cameras are for revenue collection. If we need it anyway. Mr Kenyon trots out the old throwaway `If you don't want to get caught speeding, don't speed', foolishly revealing his ignorance and unsuitability for his role. His idea of speeding is exceeding the posted limit whether it is reasonable or not. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence would understand if speeding is an issue in regards to road safety it must mean travelling at a speed that is unsuitable and dangerous for the conditions. He clearly does not understand this.
This camera has caught the second-highest number of motorists in Adelaide. What needs to be shown is how many fatalities or even accidents occur here. If as I suspect given the piece of road in question the answer is none, then clearly the amount of motorist exceeding the limit present no threat to road safety therefore the camera must be placed there only to collect money.
Wait before anything else: does SA only have one fixed speed camera???? Count yourself lucky lol
Don't speed.
No problem.
/Thread.
There's more in the pipeline. Don't have a problem with them if they say they are for road safety and they put them in accident blackspots but when they put them on down hill slopes right after a speed sign in an area that has bugger all accidents and say they are for road safety then that's a bit much!
need boost...
FIRST fixed camera! You should be glad they're starting to have fixed ones instead of sneaky mobile ones!
nathans VY Calais - 'Calais 2.0' | VT Equipe | VS Calais **SOLD!**
I've never been glad to get more speed cameras but I do believe if you do the crime then pay the fine so they don't bother me a hell of a lot, what I would like to see though is all this money the government rakes in from the extra cameras they keep purchasing every year going towards improving our roads, and perhaps some decent training for the guys laying them on how to do it properly.
What do you mean by "speed"?Originally Posted by STEEV888
dont worry, they have plenty of mobile ones.FIRST fixed camera! You should be glad they're starting to have fixed ones instead of sneaky mobile ones!
Torana Addict
We've had em for years, don't go over the speed limit through them and you don't get a fine. It may seem illogical at first but it makes sense after a while.
Really?
You asked me a question that you 100% knew the answer to but because i did not word it in the exact politically correct way you make out like it was not understandable.
Bitch please.
Donati..Whoa Green
Second highest catching speed camera is a revenue raiser? No, it just mean to many idiots speed down that particular road.
-Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)
-Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian
-Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short Phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Ronald Reagan (1986)
we have have shitloads of fixed camera's, but i think this particular one doesn't have a sign on the road warning you that there is one coming up unlike the others and we have plenty of sneaky camry mobile ones as well.FIRST fixed camera! You should be glad they're starting to have fixed ones instead of sneaky mobile ones!
The Mad Dutchman
Your freedom ends where mine begins
I alwasy lol at these thread people calling speed camera's revenue raisers.
You only pay if you are breaking road rules.
Knowing that there is a good chance you will be caught speeding but speeding anyway is stupid.
What more stupid is when I see threads on here sometime bitching about being fined for speeding.
You are told the rules of the game, you are told the penalties for breaking the rules, you CHOSE to break the rules and then bitch about copping a penalty you were well aware of.
I agree that speed camera's do speed #### all to improve road safety, but they are not revenue raisers because only people who chose to pay this "tax" are required to.
Wow, we are all good little subjects. No wonder our lawmakers get away with whatever they want.
I 100% know the answer but I’m not sure you have a grasp. Despite it having been explained in my initial post. The government claim speed cameras save lives. No evidence exists to directly relate speed cameras to this claim. Nevertheless they are their major strategy to reducing the road accidents. Road accidents are the result of drivers doing things that put them in situations where they crash. This involves driving in a manner where they lose control i.e. driving in a way that does not suit the road or the conditions.
I can drive legally at 50 kmh down my street and not be exceeding the posted limit. As I have the ability to think for myself instead of blindly obeying everything that is thrown at me I refrain from travelling at this speed. I consider it to be generally dangerous due to the narrowness of the street and especially if cars are parked ether side. I can drive on the South Eastern Freeway at speeds exceeding the posted limit, illegally but still relatively safely in the right conditions.
So is your definition of speeding exceeding a posted limit or driving at a speed that is dangerous in a particular set of conditions?
Yes one would be quite stupid to knowingly exceed the posted limit through one or indeed to go around driving in that fashion anyway.
They raise revenue. Fact. There is no evident to directly relate them to improving road safety.
Your freedom ends where mine begins
Yes, they to raise revenue. And I'm pretty sure your second sentence is void since that's exactly what I said.
What I am saying is that are not "revenue raisers". A revenue rasier would be something that is put in place to collect revenue from people going about their day.
Example, fuel excise is a revenue raiser. The GST is a revenue raiser.
This is because in normal day to day life there is no way to avoid paying these taxes.
A speed camera on the other hand give a driver 2 options. Pay a fine or don't pay a fine.
When someone speeds they are essentially saying "Yes, I am prepared to hand money over to the goverment and that is my choice"
Essentaially, speed camera's are like Tin shakers asking for donation to a cause.
Speed camera's are asking for a donation to go on the goverments bottom line and people who speed are chosing to make that donation.
It's completely avoidable therefore I can't agree with it being called a revenue raiser because if no one was exceeding the speed limit, no one would pay and in turn there would be no speed camera's.
I believe Speeed cameras are a vital part of a road safety strategy. Unfortunately they are utilized with raising revenue as a primary objective and road safety as a secondary benefit. In melbourne Speed cameras are usually set up on the best, safest roads with conservative speed limits (eastlink) so that a high number of motorist are being caught. As a result 80% of speeding fines are for exceeding the speed limit from 3-9kph (not really speeding in my book).
Speed and red light cameras should be used in accident hot spots and roads which are notorious for speeding and dangerous driving. There should be no thought whatsoever regarding how much money they will make, any revenue should be a secondary benefit, not the primary objective.
Your freedom ends where mine begins
Much lolz had at this statement.
Correct.
Completely agree. The solution is to increase speed limits on such roads to 150kmph. Works great in Europe on roads that are of a lesser quality. Also agree that fines for a 3-9kmph speed excess are pointless. In general, I think speed limits in general and speeding fines in general as stupid as a speed limit doesn't prevent "stupid". Example, me driving along at 150kmph like a normal person and within the limits of my vehicle and conditions is less dangerous than a retard in a POS driving at 80kmph ducking and dodging from lane to lane, tail gating, etc.
I personally don't understand why every intersection doesn't have red light camera's. The goverment has money for speed camera's every 3m which will catch people speeding 3kmph over the limit which is unlikely to cause a dangerous situation while apaprently people running red lights in not something the goverment is looking to prevent.
Donating Member
I agree with you there, however, would this run on a similar system as the autobahn. i.e. Slow cars to the left fast cars to the right? Because not all cars can travel at a constant 150km/h for an extended period of time without overheating and or consuming heaps of fuel. ( im refering to work utes so hiluxes and the like) You have to cater for everyone driving on the road for it to be safe.
This is so true. I saw a car swerve round a car stopped at a red light to run the red light. Couldn't believe my eyes its people who do things like this who cause more accidents than the people exceeding the speed limit by 3-9km/h
97 WRX AWD
Tein Coilovers + EDFC Dampener Control - Whiteline heavy duty Rear sway bar - Whiteline Droplinks front and rear
Turbosmart dual stage boost controller
IHI VF34 Turbo - XForce 3inch TBE - Oversized TMIC - Unichip PiggyBack ECU
PPG Straight cut 1st & 2nd, Slight helical 3rd & 4th and standard fifth - HD Clutch - custom braided clutch line
02 wrx 4pot front calipers - DBA500 two peice slotted rotors - Steel braided Lines
BP98 safe tune @ 171.8awkw
Your freedom ends where mine begins
Well, if it was to run like the Autobarn then it would be Fast cars in the Left and slow in the right.
But I'm being silly.
We already have laws in Australia that dictact you are to keep left unless overtaking in speed zones of 80kmph and above. Just no one abides by them.
And thus me come to the crux of the issue. THere are too many idiots and ####sticks on our roads who don't abide by the road rules for us to be trusted with a raised speed limit.
When I was driving in germany, I nearly came in my pants I was so excited watching how well it works.
99.9% of drivers abide the road rules to the letter on the autobarn. Trucks all sit on the right and when one is overtaking a slower truck, just as the end of it's trailer passes the truck it's overtaking the other driver flashes to indicate it is safe for them to merge back into the right lane and out of the way of other, faster traffic.
On the unlimited sections, I didn't venture into the far left lane because that was basically reserved for the 200kmph+ vehicles. And if a car was say doing 200kmph in that lane and there was another vehicle coming up behind at 250kmph, it was up to the slower vehicle to move into a slower lane as to not disrupt the faster vehicle. People actually checking their rear view mirrors before pulling into a faster lane to ensure they didn't get in the path of a faster vehicle. It was amazing to watch and just wonderful to drive on a road where everything was so predictable. When we got back here, I was shattered. retards in the right lane doing 10kmph under the limit and resulting to move, trucks in every lane, people all driving in an unpredictable fashion.
Absolute disaster. Thus speed limits here will never be increased because we have to cater for a majority of idiots, wankers and tools.
Just another demonstration of a complete lack of rational thought from people in charge of our roads. They are too focused on people with modified cars because that makes us "hoons" and too focused on speeding and speed limits.
And speed bumps... ####ing annoying as #### speed bumps.
Speeding in this day and age is a direct result of:
1. Un-synchronised traffic lights causing congestion
2. Idiots who drive (slow drivers in the outside lane, swirving, inability to make traffic gaps)
3. Roads that were made in the 1980's and are supposed to handle 10 times the amount of congestion to what they saw 10 years ago.
If the RTA correctly synchronised the traffic lights and flow, built new roads WITHOUT TOLLS and the law enforcement agency actually patrolled and fined idiotic motorists instead of hiding in bushes with cameras, it would ease congestion and traffic flow - drastically reducing the need for speeding.
But, that would cost more money than it would make wouldn't it. So we can easily see that the primary concern for both the RTA and Law Enforcement agencies now lies in the margins of profit under the guise of 'safety'.
So it seems you agree in general with what Im getting at. My only issue with red light cameras is people who know where the cameras are that hit the anchors as soon as the lights turn amber even though there is plenty of time to make it. It can be dangerous for cars and especially trucks driving behind them. But I guess that's peoples stupidity to blame, not the cameras
Your freedom ends where mine begins
Precisely.
If the goverment/police/road authorities are serious about addressing road safetly, then they should be focusing on the cause of ALL collisions and deaths, peoples stupidity.
Because at the end of the day, all collisions come about because someone is driving in a stupid manner that is beyond their vehicles capabilities OR their own capabilities.
People need to be able to objectively guage their driving skills, the capability of their vehicles and decided on what is an appropriate way for them to drive.
But, people are too stupid to do this and therefore the next step is for the goverment to control this.
Some people are simply incapable of the skills of driving, and therefore should be removed from the roads or prevented from getting onto the roads in the first place.
Much tougher driver testing, better driver education and then much harsher penalities are the only way to go.
This in turn will remove all the idiots from the roads and make it much safer for the rest of us. Once there are only drivers or a certain intelligence and skills level on the roads driving cars of a certain standard, speed limits can be increased or removed, emissions will be decreased and the drive to Melbourne from my place will go from being 1.5hours in peak hour to 30min in peak hour.
/Wet dream of driving utopia...
Unfortunately there is no way to asses if this is the case. As you say they are used more often than not in places where the risk of fatalities are not common. 60% of fatalities occur in the country however 60% of the cameras are not.
Which is exactly what this camera is doing. It hijacks drivers whose speed increases as they descend into the tunnel for a few seconds. They pose no threat to anyone. In fact to brake as you enter the underpass would be arguably more dangerous as everyone would be braking at different times and at different degrees. Especially the way people tailgate these days.
Totally agree with red light cameras. Running red lights is a major concern
Too many people approach intersections on the gas. When lights have been green for a while it makes more sense just to coast through. If you are prepared to stop then the need to slam on brakes is reduced. It is an excuse that never makes sense to me when people run through red or long term amber because they “didn’t have time to stop”.
If speed cameras are part of a road safety strategy then the money created from them should be used to improve conditions, driver training etc etc but it isn't and that's what erks me about them. I could handle it if the government came out and said we are going to send more cameras out to raise more money but I can't handle people that are too gutless to tell it as it is, saying they are for road safety is just full of c..p!
If I speed then fine me and I don't have a problem with it as I know what I'm doing. If anyone is serious about road safety then the first thing they have to look at is the conditions everyone has to put up with because many people die on our roads and many accidents happen that have nothing to do with speeding!
1. i dont live in one of the big cities but i do like an hour north of sydney and have 3 or 4 cameras around and all the cameras are actually doing their job because i remember what it was like before them. 1 of them is on a straight stretch of road with a spped limit (was 80) of 70 and people would always speed along here and at the end was a sharp turn and a bridge and the otherside was a relatively unused but blind cornered side street and there were multiple crashes here could say almost monthly mostly of persons hitting the bridge but also of drivers coming out of the road.
since they dropped the limit to 70 and put in a speed camera there had only been 1 crash that i can remember and it was 2 people speeding the first guy saw the camera and hit the brakes and the one behind hit him. i use this road most days of the week and have never seen it go off or heard of anybody with a fine from it.
another camera was put at a school where there were many unfortunate accidents where children were being hit by cars as it was a 4 way (with a median strip) road, solution here was drop speed limit from 80 to 60 and the main goal of the camera was to enforce the already there 40 zone, which it has worked exceptionally well and i also cant think of a time where a child has been hit.
the 3rd one is pretty much identical to the 2nd one.
2. i myself do this also especially around the suburbs called "bluehaven and woongarah" where its pretty hard to get above 30 in the windy roads, these are both new estates and i think they are built like that to combat speeding, the road your talking about sounds the opposite, old and overcrowded so its the same outcome with different scenarios.
there is also a couple of roads with the signs that say "rural road no speed limit advised" so technically you could go 12 i think it is there but you (I) wouldnt dare lol
3. 100% agree refer to next post.
4. i define speeding as going higher than the advertised speed limit because if there was no speed limit you wouldnt be speeding. whether or not you deem it an acceptable speed or not.
Posting Permissions
10Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
