Disgusting.

Is this for the Ambulance service!

Fire--Operational Support.

Ok, thought it sounded to complicated for ambo service, exams etc.

Road deaths and serious injury are caused by alcohol, inappropriate speed for the conditions, young inexperienced drivers out to prove how macho they are, abominably bad drivers, falling asleep and crossing over into oncoming traffic, mechanical wrecks still on the road .etc. NOT by exceeding the speed limit 10 k's along a wide, well it and maintained motorway .so why would the police use their precious resources setting up cameras in those exact spots .hmmmmm tough one that
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$-
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Note, though, I am only permitted to drive light response, not heavy (appliances), because I don't have a pump rating.

What happens when a decent prang happens on a motorway!All the traffic stopped for hours have bitchin moanin drivers swearing and cursing at the speeder who caused it. But accidents dont happen on motorways because of speed do they.Mind you up north you may be lucky to get up to speed with all the congestion.

of course its income generated,just like the police hiding just over the brow of a hil in pukekohe this morning standing on the raod one with radar gun the other ready to signal caught people to pull over.not in a dnagerous area more a good place to collect revenue

From my observations the biggest catalyst with motorway accidents is following distance. I wouldn't think that doing an extra 1 - 10km/h in fine conditions would really be much of a factor at all, especially if it meant less glancing down at the speedometer.

Yet which is getting the lions share of Policing!

Its important to not get sucked into the idea of lumping those accidentally doing and extra few km/h, with those intentionally and significantly exceeding the speed limit.

For speed to be a factor in a motorway crash it would tend to be significant or actually dangerous driving misconstrued mislabeled as excessive speed. (i.e someone doing 110km/h but weaving in and out of traffic in a dangerous manner).

I think you will find the justification is that by targeting 10kph over (yet to here of anyone being done for 1kph over) is to stop accident in the first place as it will discourge people from going even faster than 110kph which is excatly what would happen if they let it go. But then people would moan about being done for 115kph, "awww its only 5kph over the allowable tollarance."
Some people woudnt be happy if you had a speed limit of 150kph on some roads as they would still go faster, its just human nature.
But you could have a tolarance of 10kph but then triple the fines if you get caught over that and the demerits, or is that unfair to! I can here the moaning already.

If the speed limit was 150, I certainly wouldn't be travelling at that. #1, petrol costs. #2, our roads are not suitable for it in many cases and #3, I also like a drive to be reasonably relaxing and to be honest, you just cannot relax on our roads at 150, you have to be on your toes. Im not saying that you can get some shut-eye at 100, but it certainly is more relaxing when you are travelling far slower than what the road is capable of. It goes both ways though, if you are travelling too slow then you (well for me anyway) tend to get wound up and frustrated that Im travelling slower than I should have to, and I end up burning heaps of gas, tailgating and eventually passing at as fast as the wee girl will go! I would hardly call that safe practice but it is just what happens.

Firstly, plenty of people will have got fines for 1km/h over the limit, they just don''t realise it. That's the despicable bit, what the Police don't factor in is the +/- 3km/h accuracy of their radar. That's likely why its a 4km/h long weekend tolerance, its the lowest they can go before all the tickets could be thrown out in court.

With regard to people moaning regardless of the tolerance. Well to some degree I agree with you, sure there will always be some who don't like any traffic enforcement. However, there comes a point where you are over Policing to levels of absurdity and with regular 1km/h real tolerances we have clearly reached that.

In my opinion there is nothing difficult about solving this issue. So long as people are willing to remove all revenue and all quantity centric objectives.

Road Policing should first and foremost be open and honest in its operation. The survey's, studies and assumptions used as a basis of policy should be freely available to the public.

Regulations similar to the fair trading act should be introduced as mentioned above and honesty should be a top priority in all aspects of Policing.

Road Policing should be tailored specifically to the local area's changing hazards.

Officers should be measured and rewarded for their abilities to Police the full extent of traffic law. When a focus is applied to a particular area of law it must be varied. In other words focus on following distance during periods of bad weather is encouraged. Campaign after campaign focusing on speed should be discouraged.

A varied approach to disincentives should be encouraged also, with the primary focus being on education. For example, if someone is stopped for indicating incorrectly through a roundabout. If its their first time caught for such an offense why not take the 10 minutes to explain the rules, working through a leaflet of examples together that the driver can take away. If the same driver is caught doing the same thing withing a certain time period then fine them in the second instance. (This should be really easy and cheap to implement in this day and age)

Also, why does the whole system have to revolve around disincentives! Everyone knows you are not supposed to educate anyone using only negative reinforcement. There are plenty of ways to encourage and reward people to drive more safely.

I could go on, but I have probably made this to long already. Hopefully you get my drift. Sadly because of the scale and effectiveness of the Police PR machine people get guided in to petty arguments over semantics.This is a real shame as all road Police actions should be measured against a very simple yardstick which should be "Is this the best way to use our resources to increase safety AND is it fair and reasonable"

you already know Jazz, I agree with everything you have just said. I particually like the suggestion of educating people on the road side where possible. Will really make the message sink in.

http://www.stalkerradar.com/pdf/dsr_specifications.pdf

this has the accuracy of the stalker, acutally ±3.2km/h when the patrol vehicle is moving. Meaning you have less than 1 km/h of tolerance at times.

on the plus side, if the cop is doing 100 km/h then if you are doing 220 km/h or more then their radar won't lock on. Must try that some day

I know one of the operators of those vans personally - contrary to popular belief, no they DO NOT have a quota system. The van driver, in all likely hood moved only for his personal satisfaction of getting more speeders. It's not some conspiracy the Government has.

How accuarte is your speedo! Is there an act that stipulates the accuracy of this instrument! If not, how can the speed camera boys (guns or vans) state with any truthfulness that anyone was exceeding the limit if their speedo says they were only doing 100 kph! I know in UK ALL fixed speed cameras HAVE to be draped in Hi-Vis jackets with flashing lights etc to warn drivers they are about to be nicked and, with the exception of police radar guns, mobile units aren't allowed (they use modern technology such as ANPR, radar, VASCAR and the like to catch rogue motorists. Tolerance is about 16-20 kph and more on motorways.

I think that if all the money from traffic fines/tickets went into our roads, we'd have some damn fine roads! But it doesn't, it goes into the one pot. Blame the governments for that. (All of them.)

You saw them to huh!

What a load of crap you write. Best you reread exactly what you have written and you will find you are contrdicting yourself. You being so anti police and all.
This yardstick you are talking about is already being adhered to. IT'S CALLED THE LAW.

And that just about sums it up.

Give it a break.there's no place here for common sense, personal experience or logic. Take it elsewhere.

the van here in whg .hide just around the corner on western hills drive .5 yrds away from the 50k sign .you cant see it untill you are on .but we dont hide thay say

Keep to the speed limit but keep left allow built up traffic to pass when you can and let everyone go at passing lanes. Just because others do 120 does not make it okay for others to do the same,

Jazz and others, you are piddling into the wind trying to get thru to those that keep appearing in these threads suffering from ???ostrich syndrome??

I have nothing to add to this thread (mainly due to the fact jazz is in it dribbling his usual.)
But i do have a question (to which i'm sure jazz will have a "conspiracy" theory on)

Why do you all insist on calling crashes 'accidents', i'd say 1% of crashes are accidental and the other 99% are due to driver inattentivness (sp!) / fault, which means it wasn't accidental.