LeeM Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 22 minutes ago, pocketscience said: Were they ever anywhere other than freeways? I don't recall seeing them elsewhere - at least in NSW. I vaguely remember a cop on tv quoting the SA road laws saying its law over 80kph to keep 'as near as practicable to the left side of the carriageway', and they will enforce it by fining people. Doesn't change the majority of muppets in built up areas doing 10kph under 60 or 70kph though does it? Getting older and angrier, so I'm gunna fit a bull bar to the van and start ramming people I reckon. Jason A and P-Kay 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishcop Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 26 minutes ago, LeeM said: I vaguely remember a cop on tv quoting the SA road laws saying its law over 80kph to keep 'as near as practicable to the left side of the carriageway', and they will enforce it by fining people. Doesn't change the majority of muppets in built up areas doing 10kph under 60 or 70kph though does it? Getting older and angrier, so I'm gunna fit a bull bar to the van and start ramming people I reckon. It's 90km/h nationally - so any dual carriageway signposted 90 or above requires vehicles to be in the left lane unless overtaking - dual carriage ways with 80kp/h zones or below allow you to sit where you want. I'm having to learn a lot of tolerance living in Port Macquarie - it's primarily still a coastal 'retirement' town full of septo/octogenarians who have either lost their confidence driving , or have developed that self-entitled "I'm in no hurry, and nor should you be" attitude. I get as upset as the next bloke about being tailgated, but jesus you can almost understand how it happens where I live! LeeM 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkay Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 2 hours ago, LeeM said: That's probably just some snotty 20 year old math major uni grad's theory to justify their government paid studies. I actually fully read through one such study and it’s so hypothetical I don’t know what to say (yes lockdown had me doing weird things 😅) They’ve basically worked out exactly where THEY believe you would stop (reaction time and braking distance) if you’re going 60kmh. I think in their test you stopped after 38 metres or something. The object they place there is safe In the second scenario they increase the vehicles speed by 5kmh place an object just a touch beyond the theoreticaL stopping point above and this time it hits the object. From this they have concluded you are twice as more likely to cause death by exceeding the posted limit by 5kmh I even compared their braking distances against the car I owned at the time, a 2.4 tonne SUV, and based on the manufacturers claims I could stop in about half what the TAC had in their study (reaction times separate) Also, if this TAC ad below is anything to go by, it’s instant carnage the second we exceed the posted limit. I agree with road safety and there’s never an excuse for being a knob on the road, but we all know it’s not about that anymore as far as cameras are concerned LeeM 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coastr Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 I have been misunderstood. My personal belief is that the largest contribution to accidents these days is inattention - to driving, not to speed cameras. There’s no point looking out for cameras as they can see further than you can. Cameras take attention away from driving by being fixated on the Speedo and scanning the side of the road. it’s true that death is more likely for each 10kmh increase - for pedestrians, that is. I support 50kmh suburban limits as the difference in pedestrian impacts is significant but the delay to drivers is not. I don’t support the gradual lowering of limits on freeways, arterial and country roads. The creation of a traffic fine government mandated private industry is like anything else the government creates - a little entity that is self reinforcing, and that creates enough revenue to fund propaganda supporting its own life, while the opposite case has no funding, no friends and no future. Despite it being a towering pile of horse leftovers. The whole thing fails when the ‘opposition’ is more interested in getting hold of the revenue for their pet projects. See also the training industry, the safety industry, etc etc LeeM, GC9911, GTP911 and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishcop Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 2 hours ago, Jkay said: I actually fully read through one such study and it’s so hypothetical I don’t know what to say (yes lockdown had me doing weird things 😅) They’ve basically worked out exactly where THEY believe you would stop (reaction time and braking distance) if you’re going 60kmh. I think in their test you stopped after 38 metres or something. The object they place there is safe In the second scenario they increase the vehicles speed by 5kmh place an object just a touch beyond the theoreticaL stopping point above and this time it hits the object. From this they have concluded you are twice as more likely to cause death by exceeding the posted limit by 5kmh I even compared their braking distances against the car I owned at the time, a 2.4 tonne SUV, and based on the manufacturers claims I could stop in about half what the TAC had in their study (reaction times separate) Also, if this TAC ad below is anything to go by, it’s instant carnage the second we exceed the posted limit. I agree with road safety and there’s never an excuse for being a knob on the road, but we all know it’s not about that anymore as far as cameras are concerned Yep, 10kph slower would totally have changed the outcome of that (pffft!). What would have changed it is dad not over-reacting to a missed turn or something unexpected - and that's where the incredible lack of driver training this country skips out on when licensing drivers comes into play. And government is conveniently ignoring that a current model car with the driver aids they're mandating probably wouldn't have let a driver get it into this sort of strife (my current daily most certainly would have reacted well before I noticed that I hadn't). Driving a car is an exercise in self discipline in every respect, and driving like a dickhead should always be called out. But anyone who happily drinks the kool-aid that 5-10 kp/h over an arbitrary limit will result in loss of life is a patsy, just like the voter that is okay with government permanently reducing the speed limit on a deteriorating road in the name of saving lives rather than demanding the road gets fixed is a patsy. Preaching to the converted here I'm sure Jkay and Redracn 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkay Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 1 hour ago, Fishcop said: . Preaching to the converted here I'm sure The converted… choir… pastor… the lot lol as far I’m concerned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeM Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 Trying not to be a smartass here @Fishcop, but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishcop Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 1 hour ago, LeeM said: Trying not to be a smartass here @Fishcop, but... Not for a second would I take this as being a smartarse - it's all good debate! But that grab above is wrong... I flogged the below explanation out of the NRMA website as it's easier to use than the Act. The emphasis in red is mine. It's helpful to know Australia now doesn't allow a #5 in prescribed speed limits - all our limits end in a zero you'll notice, so the next level ABOVE 80kph is 90kph - ipso facto the requirement to be in the left lane in 90 and above i was talking about. I've also highlighted the tricky one - congested traffic, this can open to interpretation... Keeping left Drivers are to keep to the left on a multi-lane road where the speed limit is over 80 kilometres per hour and are only allowed to drive in the right lane in certain circumstances, such as: Overtaking Turning right Making a U-turn from the centre of the road There is a ‘Left lane must turn left sign’ or left traffic lane arrows apply and the driver is not turning left The driver is required to drive in the right lane if traffic signs require a particular kind of vehicle to drive in the marked lane indicated by the signs. Avoiding an obstruction Traffic in every lane is congested The right lane is a special purpose lane in which the driver is permitted to drive There are only two marked lanes and the left lane is a slow vehicle turn out lane. If a ‘Keep Left Unless Overtaking’ sign is displayed, then you must keep left regardless of the speed limit (unless overtaking). LeeM 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeM Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 Cheers @Fishcop, I didn't think you'd take my post as being a smart arse...even though it's in my nature to be just that! 😁👍 Fishcop and Jkay 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh Posted 1July, 2021 Report Share Posted 1July, 2021 Let’s just say, hypothetically, if I was speeding, no, not me, someone else was speeding, on a motorcycle without a number plate would there be a risk of getting caught? I should add I wasn’t wearing pants and I was was doing a wheelie, one handed, giving the police the finger. Wouldn’t have been more than 5km over, surely that’s ok yeh? Fishcop 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.