Speed Limit Tolerances to be Lowered in QLD

[csv8]

Queensland drivers will have less leeway around maximum speed limits under a new police crackdown.

Police Commissioner Ian Stewart said officers would be more ruthlessly applying the speed limit when doling out fines.

Speed tolerances will be lowered, meaning drivers will be fined for exceeding the limit by less.

But drivers should not expect police to disclose the new tolerance range.
Advertisement

Mr Stewart said that would only create a ‘‘de facto speed limit’’.

“The speed limit is the maximum. It is not a guide or a recommendation,’’ Mr Stewart said.

‘‘Changes to speed tolerances will be incremental over time, and will be guided by evidence such as the road toll and public compliance with the speed limits.’’

Speed margins have previously been set higher in Queensland to account for inaccuracies in the state's older camera system.

Last year, 59 people died on Queensland roads as the result of speed-related crashes.

The state’s road toll currently stands at 138 - 16 more than at the same time last year, 28 more than in 2011 and 30 more than in 2010.

Despite the crackdown, Mr Stewart said he hoped there would not be an increase in the number of speeding tickets issued across the state.

Speed camera locations will also be officially published for the first time under changes to come into effect from July 1.

The speed camera locations will be published from July 1 on the website www.police.qld.gov.au.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/quee...618-2oeyr.html

[EDManual]

59 people died of speed related crashes. Really what that means is that maybe 2 of those were actually speeding and one was in a police chase in a stolen car, the other blind drunk as well as speeding. The rest perhaps old ladies doing 60 not noticing a corner coming up in a 100 zone where they should slow down to 30 and driving off cliffs.

[Blue Roo]

Two words - Revenue Raising.

[flappist]

There is only one cure for this problem.

If the federal government took all income from speeding fines from the states for use in other programs that had nothing to do with those states I am very sure all of a sudden speeding would not be a major cause anymore and they would focus on something else.

Every K over is a dollar.

We have the best road safety policy money can buy.

[2011G6E]

...is it time for me to wheel out my usual statement about how speed detection devices used by the cops are the ONLY measuring instrument of any sort that is perfectly, absolutely, magically, 100% accurate in all circumstances with no margin for error possible? Even an atomic clock has a "plus or minus" allowance added after a measurement, but a hand held laser or radar gun in some cops wobbling hand in who-knows-what environmental conditions is always 100% dead-on accurate to the kilometer an hour with no variation.

Then I imagine it would be time for someone to say "Who said anything about very low or zero tolerance for speeding tickets?".


...well...this article does...that's what mentions it...


They never admit that the speedometers in our cars are not 100% accurate...they vary from the factory, they vary as your tyres wear down or new tyres are fitted, they vary as mechanical parts wear. They're much better now than they used to be and usually read on the slow side so you're pretty safe, but anyone with an older car should be a little worried about this tolerance-lowering rubbish.
You shouldn't have to go out and buy a GPS to double check your speedo all the time as you drive...you should be able to sit on an indicated speed by your cars speedo and be allowed to have a little leeway to allow for variation in readings.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

...is it time for me to wheel out my usual statement about how speed detection devices used by the cops are the ONLY measuring instrument of any sort that is perfectly, absolutely, magically, 100% accurate in all circumstances with no margin for error possible? Even an atomic clock has a "plus or minus" allowance added after a measurement, but a hand held laser or radar gun in some cops wobbling hand in who-knows-what environmental conditions is always 100% dead-on accurate to the kilometer an hour with no variation.

Then I imagine it would be time for someone to say "Who said anything about very low or zero tolerance for speeding tickets?".


...well...this article does...that's what mentions it...


They never admit that the speedometers in our cars are not 100% accurate...they vary from the factory, they vary as your tyres wear down or new tyres are fitted, they vary as mechanical parts wear. They're much better now than they used to be and usually read on the slow side so you're pretty safe, but anyone with an older car should be a little worried about this tolerance-lowering rubbish.
You shouldn't have to go out and buy a GPS to double check your speedo all the time as you drive...you should be able to sit on an indicated speed by your cars speedo and be allowed to have a little leeway to allow for variation in readings.

Where did you hear rubbish??

All police equipment is calibrated to already give you a discount, in case of inaccuracies. This includes all radar equipment used for speed checks as well as the alcohol testing equipment they use at RBT.

All radar equipment is calibrated in a such a way that even at maximum error against you it will still only read the actual speed, and most of the time it will display a lower speed than actual speed, and 98% of police will give you another few km discount on top of that. So in NSW you would have to have an actual speed of nearly 120 km per hour in a 110km zone before the cop would even look at you.

So the reading they get using their equipment is already lower that the true reading. That's why they offer drink drivers the opportunity to take a blood test after they fail the breath test, as the blood test done at a hospital will give a higher reading.

And yes it's YOUR responsibility to ensure your cars speedo reads correctly, as it is your car, not anyone else's, if you want to drive you make sure the equipment you use to do so is up to the task of doing so safely and legally.

[kyro_02]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Where did you hear rubbish??

All police equipment is calibrated to already give you a discount, in case of inaccuracies. This includes all radar equipment used for speed checks as well as the alcohol testing equipment they use at RBT.

If it is calibrated correctly, and whose to say the speed they got you at wasn't from a previous car?
So they give you a 2nd RBT, why don't they give you a 2nd speed test? oh...wait.. lol

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

And yes it's YOUR responsibility to ensure your cars speedo reads correctly, as it is your car, not anyone else's, if you want to drive you make sure the equipment you use to do so is up to the task of doing so safely and legally.

Yes, any whose to say you get your speedo checked, and if required fixed.. a couple of weeks or days down the track its out? - yes again, it falls back on the driver, but in all fairness; where is the lee-way??

Police need to have their equipment checked as well, but we the drivers have no proof that the equipment was checked unless going through a hundred hoops? My brother got caught by a speed camera(however, same scenario as police equipment re: calibration dates. - 130 in an 80 (iirc) zone, and guess what... it was not calibrated on the correct date, and further investigation led to believe the equipment was out of wack.. obviously, because the fine was dropped. But the fact is, they can and DO use equipment that was 1.) either not calibrated correctly. or 2.) no calibrated on the correct date.

but, to the not-so knowledge driver, he no doubt-ably would have copped the fine and paid it..

edit: and fyi: im not a typical cop basher-****-talker, i respect the police as my brother is a police officer, and at the end of the day they have a job to do

I hate the way the government is run, and their revenue raising scams

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by kyro_02

If it is calibrated correctly, and whose to say the speed they got you at wasn't from a previous car?
So they give you a 2nd RBT, why don't they give you a 2nd speed test? oh...wait.. lol



Yes, any whose to say you get your speedo checked, and if required fixed.. a couple of weeks or days down the track its out? - yes again, it falls back on the driver, but in all fairness; where is the lee-way??

Police need to have their equipment checked as well, but we the drivers have no proof that the equipment was checked unless going through a hundred hoops? My brother got caught by a speed camera(however, same scenario as police equipment re: calibration dates. - 130 in an 80 (iirc) zone, and guess what... it was not calibrated on the correct date, and further investigation led to believe the equipment was out of wack.. obviously, because the fine was dropped. But the fact is, they can and DO use equipment that was 1.) either not calibrated correctly. or 2.) no calibrated on the correct date.

but, to the not-so knowledge driver, he no doubt-ably would have copped the fine and paid it..

If any of this was the case, every car would be pulled over as the false readings would affect every perfect motorist.
That is if every motorist was perfect...

I've got this theory which sort of goes...
100 cars pass a conniving scheming fraudulent radar operator and 1 car gets pinged.
Now, Im going out on a limb here and assuming, taking into full account that to assume anything is to make an *** out of u and me, that perhaps the singular vehicle, parked on the side of the road with said operator in conference, may just have been speeding, and not the victim of some conspiracy to boost the coffers of the operators employer...

But then again, im in SA, where its like being a fan of muscle cars, we just get it.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Where did you hear rubbish??

All police equipment is calibrated to already give you a discount, in case of inaccuracies. This includes all radar equipment used for speed checks as well as the alcohol testing equipment they use at RBT.

The Victorian Supreme Court has confirmed that Speed Cameras are exempt from normal testing standards
On the 11 November 2011 the Victoria Supreme Court handed down two significant findings in the case of Agar v Dolheguy.
Speed cameras in Victoria are subject to special exemption from testing as normally applied to all trade measurement, police forensic laboratories and alcohol breath testing.
It is not necessary for the testing personal to have any documented test procedures, or any records of their tests, nor to follow any accepted standard of practice, nor to even test the device in the field.
The only requirement is that the testing officer be satisfied that it will read “true speeds”. Refer to paragraphs 35, 38 and 41(b) of the judgment
This is then taken to mean that the speed measuring device will read correctly in all possible circumstances.

http://www.fightfines.info/

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

The Victorian Supreme Court has confirmed that Speed Cameras are exempt from normal testing standards
On the 11 November 2011 the Victoria Supreme Court handed down two significant findings in the case of Agar v Dolheguy.
Speed cameras in Victoria are subject to special exemption from testing as normally applied to all trade measurement, police forensic laboratories and alcohol breath testing.
It is not necessary for the testing personal to have any documented test procedures, or any records of their tests, nor to follow any accepted standard of practice, nor to even test the device in the field.
The only requirement is that the testing officer be satisfied that it will read “true speeds”. Refer to paragraphs 35, 38 and 41(b) of the judgment
This is then taken to mean that the speed measuring device will read correctly in all possible circumstances.

http://www.fightfines.info/

Is that the case just in VIC? Wouldn't surprise me that Victoria exempts it's cameras and speed devices from regular testing and calibration.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

The Victorian Supreme Court has confirmed that Speed Cameras are exempt from normal testing standards
On the 11 November 2011 the Victoria Supreme Court handed down two significant findings in the case of Agar v Dolheguy.
Speed cameras in Victoria are subject to special exemption from testing as normally applied to all trade measurement, police forensic laboratories and alcohol breath testing.
It is not necessary for the testing personal to have any documented test procedures, or any records of their tests, nor to follow any accepted standard of practice, nor to even test the device in the field.
The only requirement is that the testing officer be satisfied that it will read “true speeds”. Refer to paragraphs 35, 38 and 41(b) of the judgment
This is then taken to mean that the speed measuring device will read correctly in all possible circumstances.

http://www.fightfines.info/

So, if the detection equipment doesn't get regular testing, and neither does your cars speedo, the only alternative is to err on the side of caution.

Now there's a revelation.

[Henryf6]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

...is it time for me to wheel out my usual statement about how speed detection devices used by the cops are the ONLY measuring instrument of any sort that is perfectly, absolutely, magically, 100% accurate in all circumstances with no margin for error possible? Even an atomic clock has a "plus or minus" allowance added after a measurement, but a hand held laser or radar gun in some cops wobbling hand in who-knows-what environmental conditions is always 100% dead-on accurate to the kilometer an hour with no variation.

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

[Trump]

Originally Posted by Henryf6

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

This is the sort of crap that makes my blood boil. And why we need to show Govco Pty Ltd the door.

[GTP-RPD]

Originally Posted by Henryf6

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

Hey mate do you have the right of appeal and can you get a better lawyer. I have never heard of anyone making a punt on anything without some form of observation eg a reference point to find a measure of something eg it took 3 seconds to travel 50 metres.

[Henryf6]

Originally Posted by GTP-RPD

Hey mate do you have the right of appeal and can you get a better lawyer. I have never heard of anyone making a punt on anything without some form of observation eg a reference point to find a measure of something eg it took 3 seconds to travel 50 metres.

This was about 4 years ago now. After this incident I reside to the fact that if they want to book you, they can and will. I am in QLD and I know the government needs the money.

You hear all the time about people getting out of tickets by taking them to court. I honestly can't believe what I hear after what I've been through.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Henryf6

Funny you should mention radar guns but what about the keen eye of the police?

I was issued a fine by an officer who " saw me speeding ". He wrote down 56 in a 40 zone on the ticket. I asked him for a radar reading to which he said " he doesn't need to show me one ". I said what about following speed? Again he said he didn't need one.

I got a lawyer, took the matter to court and lost. It wasn't until I was in court that I was informed that the officer that ticketed me has completed a course which allows him to detect speed by eye. I just about fell over.

So there you have it. The tolerences are getting tighter, the fines getting bigger, and now they don't even need evidence.

This isn't about revenue, right?

So were you speeding?

All this about what the officer did, but you haven't mentioned wether you were actually speeding or not.

I find it hard to believe that he accused you of doing nearly 50% over the posted limit, unless you were in fact clearly doing more than 40.

[csv8]

[QUOTE=BENT_8;4783813]So were you speeding?

All this about what the officer did, but you haven't mentioned wether you were actually speeding or not.

I find it hard to believe that he accused you of doing nearly 50% over the posted limit, unless you were in fact clearly doing more than 40.[/QUOTE
So Superman Does Exist !! Able to Detect Speed By Eyesight!!!

[Henryf6]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

So were you speeding?

All this about what the officer did, but you haven't mentioned wether you were actually speeding or not.

I find it hard to believe that he accused you of doing nearly 50% over the posted limit, unless you were in fact clearly doing more than 40.

It was 8pm or so at night, I turned a left hand corner heading down a slight hill, put my foot down in a 4 cylinder car for approximately 3-4 seconds. I was watching the road not the speedo. Was I speeding, possibly, but nor the officer or myself knows for sure.

Here is the point - THEY NEED NO EVIDENCE TO BOOK YOU. THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVE IT!!! They can spot any car they like and write a ticket to the driver. This is wrong in my opinion.

Ring your local police station for confirmation.

[Hulsty]

When they say speed related they include going to fast for the conditions, not necessarily over the speed limit.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Hulsty

When they say speed related they include going to fast for the conditions, not necessarily over the speed limit.

That's how they inflate the statistics, and they admit that fact in the media. There will be an accident in the rain, for example, and they'll say the deceased was "going too fast for the conditions", and these all end up in the "speeding" stats.

You can be going well within the posted limit and still be classed as "speeding"...

[BENT_8]

Another mountain out of a mole hill, gee you Qlders have it tough.

This 'lowering' of tolerances has been in effect here in SA for a while now. At one time you could cruise along 10k over the limit and not worry, not so now.

Guess what...

The revenue from fines in SA has dropped over the last two years.

And from memory the change was barely noted in the media.

How many times does it need to be said, the limit is just that, the limit.
It doesn't dictate that you must stick to it, you are free to travel 3 k's below it without fear of prosecution.
If, for arguments sake the new tolerance allowed for 3k's over @60k, and you managed to control yourself to do 58k, you would have a margin of 5k's.
At that speed an unintentional increase of 5k's would be noticeable and correctible, If you religiously push the limit and find yourself doing 64k's unintentionally in front of mr plod or one of his silent observers, SUCK IT UP!

Honestly, just lately every time one of these 'my rights are being eroded' stories comes up it comes from the same geographical section of Australia.

[2011G6E]

Even the most sensible drivers however do realise that it must be safer to have people looking out their windows instead of staring at their speedos all the time...

Oh, and no comments about "You should be able to judge your speed within a few kilometers per hour without looking at the speedo"...I would challenge the best driver in the world to cover up the speedo and tell us if he's travelling at 59kph or 61kph...come to that, you could make it 5 or more kph once you get up near 100 to 110 and you wouldn't be able to pick the difference.

There has to be allowance for variation for one simple reason: there's human beings in control of the machine, and no one is that perfect...

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Even the most sensible drivers however do realise that it must be safer to have people looking out their windows instead of staring at their speedos all the time...

Oh, and no comments about "You should be able to judge your speed within a few kilometers per hour without looking at the speedo"...I would challenge the best driver in the world to cover up the speedo and tell us if he's travelling at 59kph or 61kph...come to that, you could make it 5 or more kph once you get up near 100 to 110 and you wouldn't be able to pick the difference.

There has to be allowance for variation for one simple reason: there's human beings in control of the machine, and no one is that perfect...

Well I have driven all across the eastern and southern states of Oz in my 20 years of driving, covering around 35,000k's a year and in that time I have acquired 3 speeding tickets, one just recently infact.
At NO time have I felt the need to constantly check my speedo or scan around for speed camera's.
Perhaps im lucky, so too must be everyone I know.

Now, if 3 k's @ 60 was tolerable for arguments sake, that would allow 5.5k's @ 110, if you stuck to 107 it would give you a margin or 8-9k's.
Don't tell me you cant notice the best part of 10k's difference, I know when the rural road limit was dropped from 110 to 100 here in SA, the 10k's difference was very noticeable.

[mik]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Even the most sensible drivers however do realise that it must be safer to have people looking out their windows instead of staring at their speedos all the time...

Oh, and no comments about "You should be able to judge your speed within a few kilometers per hour without looking at the speedo"...I would challenge the best driver in the world to cover up the speedo and tell us if he's travelling at 59kph or 61kph...come to that, you could make it 5 or more kph once you get up near 100 to 110 and you wouldn't be able to pick the difference.

There has to be allowance for variation for one simple reason: there's human beings in control of the machine, and no one is that perfect...

Not only that , even cruise control is not infallible, if you suddenly hit a small sharp uphill some cruise controls act agressively and will take you over the limit momentarily untill it settles back down to what it was set.............. which may have been actually under the limit.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Honestly, just lately every time one of these 'my rights are being eroded' stories comes up it comes from the same geographical section of Australia.

It's not about rights, it's about the government injecting themselves into more and more aspects of life that an adult can manage quite well themselves. Helmets for push bikes is a good example.

The old saying "When you've got a hammer, everything you see is a nail" holds true for police and the road toll.

The police ticket people, that's the only thing they can really do. So when they are asked to help reduce the road toll their answer is to "get tougher" on people and write more tickets or reduce the margin for fines.

When they discuss the road toll it's never about substandard roads or safety or driver training. It's always stick to the road rules or else...... Because the other things require hard decisions by our political masters.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by cs123

It's not about rights, it's about the government injecting themselves into more and more aspects of life that an adult can manage quite well themselves. Helmets for push bikes is a good example.

The old saying "When you've got a hammer, everything you see is a nail" holds true for police and the road toll.

The police ticket people, that's the only thing they can really do. So when they are asked to help reduce the road toll their answer is to "get tougher" on people and write more tickets or reduce the margin for fines.

When they discuss the road toll it's never about substandard roads or safety or driver training. It's always stick to the road rules or else...... Because the other things require hard decisions by our political masters.

They can only 'inject' themselves into your life in this manner if you fall victim of the trap.

If Police were handing out tickets willy nilly there would be a public uproar, so far all im hearing is the same 'there out to get my wallet' cries from a handful on a motoring forum...go figure.

[supershifty]

Let's be realistic and read between the lines:

Queensland drivers will have less leeway around maximum speed limits under a new police crackdown.
We need more money
Police Commissioner Ian Stewart said officers would be more ruthlessly applying the speed limit when doling out fines.
We really need more money
Speed tolerances will be lowered, meaning drivers will be fined for exceeding the limit by less.
We've found a way to get more money
But drivers should not expect police to disclose the new tolerance range.
Mr Stewart said that would only create a ‘‘de facto speed limit’’.
This is going to be a fat cash cow and we'll milk it for all it's got
“The speed limit is the maximum. It is not a guide or a recommendation,’’ Mr Stewart said.
The law is the law and revenue is revenue
‘‘Changes to speed tolerances will be incremental over time, and will be guided by evidence such as the road toll and public compliance with the speed limits.’’
We are going to be sneaky about it by not keeping the masses informed
Speed margins have previously been set higher in Queensland to account for inaccuracies in the state's older camera system.
We have been enforcing the law with unreliable inaccurate equipment for years now
Last year, 59 people died on Queensland roads as the result of speed-related crashes.
The state’s road toll currently stands at 138 - 16 more than at the same time last year, 28 more than in 2011 and 30 more than in 2010.
The condition of QLD roads and the increase in road users has nothing to do with the toll
Despite the crackdown, Mr Stewart said he hoped there would not be an increase in the number of speeding tickets issued across the state.
We hope to make shitloads of coin out of this initiative
Speed camera locations will also be officially published for the first time under changes to come into effect from July 1.
We're going to loosely state where the cameras are located 3 months after we put them there to make a comparative analysis of their revenue potential

[Trump]

If somehow, every singe driver stuck to the speed limit every single time they are on the roads, the revenue stream would completely dry up and govco will then create another mechanism to keep the revenue flowing...

[Kable72]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

If somehow, every singe driver stuck to the speed limit every single time they are on the roads, the revenue stream would completely dry up and govco will then create another mechanism to keep the revenue flowing...

It will be more along the lines of everyone does the speed limit and people still die because people die from accidents, lapse of judgement, sleep deprivation, looking at the speedo for a second to long to see a kid walk out onto the road etc. IT will be all about dropping speed limits or forcing public transport use and taking away the use of our cars in a desperate attempt for "safety".

[Trump]

Originally Posted by Kable72

It will be more along the lines of everyone does the speed limit and people still die because people die from accidents, lapse of judgement, sleep deprivation, looking at the speedo for a second to long to see a kid walk out onto the road etc. IT will be all about dropping speed limits or forcing public transport use and taking away the use of our cars in a desperate attempt for "safety".

This too.

Police stopped being about ensuring people were safe on the roads a long time ago. They have since turned into revenue collectors. This is evidenced by people being routinely pinged for driving 2 or 3 km's over the limit.