Digital speed cameras to target Queensland motorists

[UNR8D]

come the election year, watch fuel drop offers of compensation to rates and then watch the moron's as a collective vote the old withering hag back in... general public has short memories thats why we get fisted in the first year then offered 'bribe's the comming years, all people remember is 6 months ago not 3 years.

[dogfish]

What I don't Understand if I am travelling at 100kmh an hour and hit something or someone or if I am travelling at 103kmh and do the same is there really going to be that much difference we're all still going to be pretty F@#ked up looking and the news reporter will be saying " A man travelling in Excess of 100kmh was majorly F@#ked up today when he ploughed into one of the poxy friggin pot holes that his $950.00 A YEAR REGO WAS SUPPOSE TO FIX Whilst travelling South Bound on the M1 out of Brisbane. He was reportedly doing a whopping 103kmh's in a 100 kmh zone police are looking into it."
It ****es me off FIX THE F@#KING ROADS IT WILL CAUSE LESS DEATHS.
Politicians are those people who you work with that always get promoted cause they are useless at their job so the boss promotes them out of His/Her area making them someone else's problem.
Look at Anna Bligh couldn't organise a in a brothel with a fist full of $50's and wella there she is premier of Queensland.
Yeah I have to Get back on the electoral role so I'm not a political Fence sitter.

[rancidpunx]

Not a week goes by without mr and mrs motorist being targeted for some more shafting. If this does not shout "revenue raising" to everybody then i dont know what would. They obviously feel hard done by that they missed out on all those fines they could have collected just above the posted limit.
Here is the line you need to read, "It is understood Queensland's figure cannot be lowered with wet-film cameras because the ageing system cannot process the extra fines that would be generated. But digital cameras would create an advanced fine-processing system."
They are eager just to get the extra fines. At the moment its fine to sit on 60 and know its fine that you just crept to 62 as you go down a hill, now everyone is going to sit at 50 just incase. To think this on top of the rego increase recently.

Just wait how long before you are charged to driving into Brisbane, or somewhere busy on the gold or sunny coast during peak hour traffic. Im willing to bet within 6 months Brisbane will defiantly have a congestion charge.
The state government has to pay for the new gateway, the new tunnels etc somehow. Oh and the new cameras, new cars to hide mobile cameras in also.

NB: this also may lead to legislation that will ultimately put a stop to modifying parts that may effect your speedo.

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by flappist

Remember when you vote

Here here, its time to go Anna

[irish2]

Originally Posted by prydey

i thought it was a lot earlier than 2006.

regardless, most magazines when they test the cars usually have a graph showing the indicated speed v road speed, and like the original article states, they are almost always on the safe side.

some people like to whinge for the sake of it - my speedo cable stretched, my tyres are worn, my car is legal even though i've changed my diff gears or gearbox etc etc.

at the end of the day, you (the owner) are responsible for making sure your cars speedo is accurate.

its not hard, i have a speedo corrector in one of my cars and have had the wheel/tyre combo changed in the pcm on the other. both at a very small cost.

I believe the ADR on speedo's went from +/- 10% to only reading +10% in 2004.

[gocruzin]

Originally Posted by schmidty

a day dragging a B double around again. So many changes in speed zones, so many rubbish drivers in cruise mode now totally oblivious to the world around them because they're off in their own little world 10kmh below the speed limit. All the government has succeeded in doing is brainwashing the dumb ones that the killer on the road is speed alone. Lack of concentration, forward planning, judgment and basic car control skills coupled with bloody phones (iphone users are the worst offenders) cause so much more danger on the roads than an alert, proficient driver traveling 3kph over the posted limit. The amount of people I'd have loved to drag out of the car and bash their iphone straight up their @*$#.......

Hear hear couldn't put it better myself!!

[388cube_edxr8]

Originally Posted by dogfish

What I don't Understand if I am travelling at 100kmh an hour and hit something or someone or if I am travelling at 103kmh and do the same is there really going to be that much difference we're all still going to be pretty F@#ked up looking and the news reporter will be saying " A man travelling in Excess of 100kmh was majorly F@#ked up today when he ploughed into one of the poxy friggin pot holes that his $950.00 A YEAR REGO WAS SUPPOSE TO FIX Whilst travelling South Bound on the M1 out of Brisbane. He was reportedly doing a whopping 103kmh's in a 100 kmh zone police are looking into it."
It ****es me off FIX THE F@#KING ROADS IT WILL CAUSE LESS DEATHS.
Politicians are those people who you work with that always get promoted cause they are useless at their job so the boss promotes them out of His/Her area making them someone else's problem.
Look at Anna Bligh couldn't organise a in a brothel with a fist full of $50's and wella there she is premier of Queensland.
Yeah I have to Get back on the electoral role so I'm not a political Fence sitter.

You, sir, are a legend. My thoughts exactly.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by irish2

I believe the ADR on speedo's went from +/- 10% to only reading +10% in 2004.

100% at 100km/h. Latter bit right. ADR 18.


In relation to the 1688 Bill, I stand by my position that it still holds sway in some jurisdictions here in OZ (ACT/NSW +). I am happy for some to scream and yell the counter POV otherwise.

I agree the Constitution and most of our Westminster system has been systematically attacked; weakened, ignored and ridiculed by modern academia for well over 30 odd years now, bit by bit lessening its intended civil protections. The yanks and GB, even France, Italy and Germany have faced similar political white-anting.

We had rights to do most all things; "implied rights", and so only parliament could infringe such, and *we* vote them, that was considered 'safe enough', our security blanket. (Though it is in fact a great deal more complex that that prima facie outline).

Much passed law of the land, state or federal, has not been challenged by a good QC team to date. Some of 'it' can be overturned, or could be. (How's that for a wide variable??). That would only occur IF a case arose that so required it, it's not be a job for a regular bumkin solicitor to challenge. Big city stuff, and as the NSW farmer story shows us, big dollars.

Some here hold hard-left, or bleeding-heart left political views (latter a lesser evil of the two:-) and will as a result disagree strongly with our current system, or - the way we were only ten plus years ago. That said, a few key Lib's support republican models.

The QLD changes ARE legit, they ARE acts of that parliament, its early days yet for more say city folk to really see impact, that could a decade or more away. One might find that only then, will apathy drop somewhat.

Find it very hard to trust most anyone or group, having regard the way 'the country' is now, and I think its fair many of you do as well.

On the other hand,- it looks great, we have our Macca's and footy still....

I'll not enter into too much legal debate, as I leave my advocacy work to the courts and agencies. My background and upbringing, primarily, so developed my opinion and knowledge- over the years:-) (Water is wet).

In history, after my old man (QC and PNG National Court judge) arrived back in Australia in 79' after a stint in PNG and Malaysia since 69', we counted some 5,000+ "bits" of legislation up to 1989, that directly made it easier for "the state" to put you in goal, and that was just NSW. As he said; "IF people *really understood* the law, they'd be up in arms about what the ALP had done.

These days, I view a couple of Lib personalities with similar suspicion.

Always healthy for the judiciary to remain mildly ignorant of parliament.

One good thing:- NSW Nats under Stoner, sought to return some supremacy to the courts, his effort corrects the situation of a driver who wins a speed-related case against NSW, in that the points must not be imposed. A small win for 'us', as its not all speed ranges, yet.

(RTA had applied such demerits even when it/the police- lost such a case).

[Keepleft]

I am officially mad, I mean't to post most of the above,- at this thread, duh:-
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...77#post2999877

Sorry to take this thread waaay off topic. . . . .

[GT290]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

I am officially mad, I mean't to post most of the above,- at this thread, duh:-
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...77#post2999877

Sorry to take this thread waaay off topic. . . . .

Not at all, both good reading and very true. I share your comments there.

[Matt47569]

what would they do if everyone did drive under the speed limit and they didnt make money out of fines anymore? lower the limit even more?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Matt47569

what would they do if everyone did drive under the speed limit and they didnt make money out of fines anymore? lower the limit even more?

Yep.

As there would still be road deaths it MUST be because the limits were too high so the need to be lowered.

90km/h state limit is on their minds already.....